> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Nikos Chantziaras<realnc@×××××.de> wrote:
>> I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-220.127.116.11-r1 and -r2
>> packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those
>> revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's zlib
>> incompatible with upstream. As a result, a lot of packages stopped
>> building. Bug reports for broken packages come in and then are being
>> modified to fit Gentoo's zlib.
>> Breaking compatibility with upstream zlib also means that non-portage
>> software, the ones I install with "./configure --prefix=$HOME/usr&& make
>> install", also won't build.
> It seemed to me like this was a silly problem from the outset. vapier
> did arguably the right thing, and if that means exposing some broken
> software, fine. We handle plenty of breakage worse than this, but I
> understand that it can be inconvenient.
> However, you completely lost any support when you said
>> Yes, bad idea. But it's in my liberty to write code however I see fit.
> That just makes me want to slap you.
> I'll echo what vapier said in response: it's absolutely your
> prerogative to do whatever you want, but it's not our responsibility
> to make sure that it works in Gentoo.
The code is perfectly valid. You cannot force people to follow your
coding standards. If it's valid C code, it doesn't matter that it
contradicts your personal preferences. It's not your code and you don't
have a saying in it. What's next, banning software that indents code
with tabs instead of spaces?
>> It's a bad call. You've made plenty of those lately. This is just another one.
>> IMO, you don't have the skills and insight to mess with this stuff. So when you
>> try, breakage happens. I hope you retire soon.
> Are you kidding me? Grow up.
This was just another episode of Vapier's hostile and arrogant behavior
towards users. Every time someone comes up with a valid argument of why
he's wrong, the final answer is "don't care, I do what I please because
I'm the dev and you're not." So my reply was the politest I could come
up with without using the f-word.