[Mageia-dev] mageia sound tasks

Sat Dec 18 15:30:59 CET 2010

On 18 December 2010 16:16, Tux99 <tux99-mga at uridium.org> wrote:
+>
+>
+> Quote: Ahmad Samir wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 15:05
+>
+>> The Mageia-dev ML is the current official packagers ML, such packaging
+>> discussions are supposed and expected to happen here.
+>
+> Sure, but that doesn't stop anyone from using other communications if they
+> want to, we are all volunteers and everyone is free to use the means they
+> prefer.
+>
+
+Quoting you:
+“the ML would quickly get polluted with too many parallel discussions
+if every sub-group did all their discussion on the same ML”
+
+That's exactly what a ML is for, parallel discussions each ideally
+contained in a thread of its own; that's what I was pointing out.
+>> This looks like coercing other packagers into adapting your point of
+>> view "if you don't agree with my POV then you're not an open community
+>> distro"; I don't like that attitude one bit.
+>
+> Nobody is coerced by me, in fact I believe in the 'live and let live'
+> principle, it's actually some dismissive posts here that made me defend
+> this principle.
+>
+>> In any distro there're rules and guidelines that should be followed
+>> (look at Debian for example); being a community distro doesn't mean
+>> anyone gets a free reign to do whatever he wants whenever he wants.
+>
+> Calm down, I don't see where I said anything to get you worked up like
+> this.
+>
+
+I am calm, you don't see me shouting, do you? :)
+
+>> Note that Michael is discussing the issue, he didn't make final
+>> decisions. If you have a productive argument to make please do so,
+>> otherwise please refrain from calling other peoples' posts "silly" (or
+>> "non-sense" judging from your other posts on the ML).
+>
+> Michael's initial post in this thread was very dismissive and not
+> productive at all, if anything you should be criticising him, I don't see
+> why you are attacking me here?
+>
+
+To put things in perspective, here's what Michael said:
+“And secondary, I think we should also try to avoid having too much task-
+rpms. Their values is in the fact they allow to quickly install a set of
+rpm without searching in the whole set of rpm.
+
+If there is too much of them, people while end searching in the various
+task-* rpms, and that seems counter productive at best.
+( ie, searching the task rpm they want to avoid searching rpm they want
+directly ... ).”
+
+Doesn't look dismissive to me, he stated rather clearly why he's
+against having too many task/meta packages.
+
+-- 
+Ahmad Samir
+