| 1 |
On 1 July 2013 17:06, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
| 3 |
> <chithanh@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> I wrote in a previous message that I would reconsider my position if the |
| 6 |
>> amount of forked packages grew to unmanageable proportions. But until |
| 7 |
>> then, if the kids cannot get along they shall play on separate playgrounds. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> As far as I'm concerned, kids who can't get along can go play |
| 10 |
> someplace else. If you want your own apache ebuild that can't be |
| 11 |
> touched by anybody but you, that's what overlays are for. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Don't like that, please don't vote for me. I have no issues with real |
| 14 |
> alternate implementations (openrc vs systemd, udev vs eudev, |
| 15 |
> consolekit vs logind, alsa sorta-vs pulseaudio, etc). However, |
| 16 |
> projects that discuss their plans openly, embrace our philosophy of |
| 17 |
> choice, and which properly support their work to our quality standards |
| 18 |
> will be able to take dumps on your packages if you put them in the |
| 19 |
> main tree and there is nothing you'll be able to do about it. Call it |
| 20 |
> tyranny of the majority if it makes you happier, but a distro that |
| 21 |
> gives every developer veto-power over any change is destined for |
| 22 |
> extinction. Innovation will always come from individual developers; |
| 23 |
> the role of the Council is not to try to mandate innovation, but to |
| 24 |
> get the roadblocks out of the way so that it can flourish. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Well said. Thank you for putting this down and taking a definitive |
| 28 |
stance once this. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Arun Raghavan |
| 32 |
http://arunraghavan.net/ |
| 33 |
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME) |
Archives