[Mageia-dev] RPM5 AND MAGEIA

Wed Mar 9 02:53:48 CET 2011

2011/3/9 Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org>:
+> Le mardi 08 mars 2011 à 23:59 +0100, Raphaël Jadot a écrit :
+>
+>> The mails are hard to read, and long, and very technicals,  but what
+>> catched my eyes is some things like
+>> "level of compatibility" between Mageia & rpm5 is far greater than any
+>> other (with
+>> other rpm5 based distros being more compatible with Mageia than Mageia
+>> is with non-rpm5 based distros as well"
+>> So it doesn't mean we have to move to rpm5 for being compatible with
+>> rpm5, so where is the problem ?
+>
+> So if there is no problem, why do people keep talking of this ?
+I don't think this is what's been talked about by others at all previously,
+the question asked by others has usually been more about decissions
+concerning rpm(5), and the problem now coming from me asking for
+references to discussions mentioned, which obviously seems to be
+inappropriate.
+
+>
+>> So if Per Oyvind offers help, unless there are hidden things i do not
+>> understand, and if he can improve rpm.org or compatibility stuff or
+>> whatever, why nobody says "ok, why not, tell us, maybe you could help,
+>> maybe not" Did not find it (at least in this ML)
+>
+> I personally answered at least on others mls :
+> ( http://lists.mandriva.com/maintainers/2011-02/msg00080.php )
+>
+> I also answered to peroyvind on irc, but I will not disclose logs of
+> private discussion.
+Yeah, but for my activity on this list and on IRC, I haven't really actually
+been pushing much of any new and intrusive things of inconvenience,
+but rather trying to attempt offer help, suggestions, advice etc., or just
+answering and commenting on regular questions on topics actually
+being discussed already.
+Yet still being ignored, and when not the response is usually some paranoia
+about some spooky intentions where no matter how many times nor how
+hard I try keep making it clear and explain to dismiss, then just that part
+gets ignored with the FUD and personal attacks remaining the same..
+>
+> I said it to unity guy who asked on #mageia-dev ( maybe he didn't pay
+> attention, or maybe he was not looking at the screen at this moment ).
+Said what?
+>
+> It was also explained during one of the first meeting for packagers who
+> asked :
+> http://meetbot.mageia.org/mageia-dev/2011/mageia-dev.2011-01-12-20.01.log.html#l-258
+>
+> So, for the n+1 time, we have no specific stuff to propose to
+> collaborate nor ressources to allocate for the moment, because we are
+> busy trying to have a infrastructure and a governance structure ready,
+> and this take time. We even did a conference on FOSDEM to explain the
+> whole process.
+Hey, it's not like I'm necessarrily able to invest much time in it
+myself yet either,
+but that doesn't prevent things from being loosely discussed or just willing
+to receive input and communicate on what already exists and answer such simple
+questions as ~"hey, do you guys have any interest in coordinating and sharing
+efforts at all? I'm all okay for trying to adapt and care for it, but
+let me at least
+know if I should bother..?", does it?
+
+I'm not pushing any great changes or trying to trick you into
+anything, most of it
+has been intended to actually help both yourself and us in saving time
+and avoiding
+unnecessary work without getting in the way for more important
+priorities, especially
+since it will get harder to start address later on if suddenly then
+you'd remotely
+express any possible interest in it only after a lot of stuff
+originally kept for compatibility
+only has been ripped out long time ago..
+>
+> If people want to do it fine, but without a clear proposal and people
+> working on doing stuff, nothing will happen. And we clearly told we have
+> more urgent things, like doing a first release, organizing, etc.
+Yes, sure, that's kinda given and not really expected that people would be
+expected to want doing it and have interest in it.
+It's not like answering one out of a dozen simple questions asked would
+require to for you to stop everything else while a person answers it, or briefly
+discussing things superficially would put great strain on your project.
+>
+>> Seems it's not the first time, in this mail
+>> https://www.mageia.org/pipermail/mageia-dev/20110109/002024.html
+>> he told  "(if interested, I could help assist you on writing something
+>> equivalent for compatibility wrapping similar to what I did in the
+>> past with rpm4compat.h & rpm46compat.h to make ie. URPM able to use
+>> rpm 4.4 & 4.6 api with rpm5, let's say rpm5compat.h or something).
+>>
+>> Whatever you end up doing, don't be afraid of asking or trying to
+>> communicate on, the mutual benefits of collaboration are rather
+>> obvious. <;o)
+>> If not, sorry for imposing."
+>>
+>> This mail had no answer, so what, is this guy a kind of antichrist of
+>> rpm , talking with sugar words and trying to backstab you ?
+>
+> Using religious vocabulary and exaggeration is IMHO something you should
+> avoid. It doesn't help.
+Dude, you're being a bit overly sensitive here,  it's not like these
+are expressions
+are considered as even uncommon nor very inappropriate to use to make points
+obvious and getting them across, if not exaggerating to make points, it would
+get very hard to miss them. And even if having issues with expressions used in
+the comparision, the point made wasn't less reasonable..
+>
+>> And at least, If the question are asked over and over, why is there so
+>> few things in archives about it ?
+>
+> I suspect that you do not correctly connect the dots.
+No, in this specific case it was quite evident on what dots where that was
+being discussed. The thread and the questions asked was quite specific with
+something as trivial as asking for references to discussions referred to as
+having taken place several times before with responses and arrgumentation
+not being consistent with what you refer to.. :|
+>
+> We have made quite clear in the roadmap, in our various communications,
+> in this ml, and elsewhere that no disruptive changes are planned for the
+> first release. This mean no systemd by default, no python change to
+> python 3, likely no gnome shell by default, no lvm by default, no
+> rolling release, etc, etc.
+No issues with your roadmap whatsoever, only questions asked based
+on reasoning provided by others that doesn't seem entirely consistent
+with what's given for the roadmap..
+Not really my issue to begin with anyhow though, not concerning me anyways..
+
+>
+> And this also includes no disruptive changes in a area like the package
+> manager if we can avoid it.
+I think this has been well-established since long time ago, only one question
+recently from one person aboutit,  with response and rationale given to
+being questioned.
+>
+>> Sure every one knows mageia will not
+>> hurry to go to rpm5 tomorrow, and so what ? If some are bored about
+>> some related questions, why not opening a FAQ that explain it, or that
+>> just point to the related archive/topic (which could be this one) ?
+>
+> That's not really a FAQ when there is at most 3 persons who asked for it
+> ( 2 being part of the upstream project ).
+I don't think I've really ever asked about this myself on this list,
+several other
+people not involved with upstream project at all has done on numerous
+occations earlier though.. ;)
+
+--
+Regards,
+Per Øyvind
+