summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/cb/6d60547df4cc6f8e93fba5929b790c91f41ede
blob: 5be397173f2aa824b41e11e1b32e5518e337f0ee (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <zooko@zooko.com>) id 1V21VD-0001tR-33
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:01:23 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from 216-155-145-223.cinfuserver.com ([216.155.145.223]
	helo=zooko.com)
	by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1V21VB-0007mV-81
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:01:23 +0000
Received: by zooko.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 501921F30055; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 20:01:12 +0400 (MSK)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 20:01:12 +0400
From: zooko <zooko@zooko.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Message-ID: <20130724160111.GF1009@zooko.com>
References: <CANEZrP2GvgZP_1z3EoSs3p+db7tZB6JfEVAewLpGE5eRpGgR3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<smumwpcg8sw.fsf@linuxpal.mit.edu>
	<CAAS2fgTxU4fb6n+fHPomOVDkEY+uoepd7QTPMxbxALYm2Sf3kg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130724023526.GD1009@zooko.com>
	<CAAS2fgQJ6B5q4xmB-UfC=jeiYDkqxK71oTvtp7MqHXRn43duTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP00vN0TFsxnpSO3RoC_aiAbGS9LG9KXM1+KqWRv8YsJXg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP00vN0TFsxnpSO3RoC_aiAbGS9LG9KXM1+KqWRv8YsJXg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	0.0 TVD_RCVD_IP            TVD_RCVD_IP
	1.0 RDNS_DYNAMIC           Delivered to internal network by host with
	dynamic-looking rDNS
X-Headers-End: 1V21VB-0007mV-81
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Greg Troxel <gdt@work.lexort.com>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Linux packaging letter
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:01:23 -0000

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:28:16AM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Yeah, if anyone wants to make the letter more digestable please do propose
> an alternative, although by this point it's probably not worth it as people
> have already signed.

Okay, here's my attempt:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m3wyBIjqwPQ3wxVT7P_wJtdWt9a9RXvt9NV7rggLAOs/edit#

Please feel free to use any or all of it as you see fit.

> FWIW, Gregory is right that my original draft was much more brusque. The
> pain in the packaging relationship travels both ways. I have in the past
> wasted a lot of time due to bogus packaging applied by non-expert packagers
> that broke things. In fact the project I was a part of adopted a policy of
> automatically closing bug reports from people who were using distributor
> packages (any distro) because the quality was so inconsistent and so many
> subtle bugs were introduced.
> 
> If packagers hear upstreams cry about packaging a lot, I think you should
> keep an open mind that some of them probably know what they're talking
> about. We really shouldn't have to beg and cajole here. Saying "we have our
> reasons and we want you to stop" should be enough.

Yes, I know what you mean.

Regards,

Zooko