[repo-coord] Zero-tolerance educational methods for promoting questionable policies??? (was: ClamAV 0.70)

[Axel Thimm]

On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 09:58:13AM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 01:40:11AM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 01:30:23AM +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> > > Still the atrpms apt package does ship with a preferences file that sets 
> > > priorities like this.
> > 
> > I could chose between this setup and commenting the dag repo out
> > 
> > http://bugzilla.atrpms.net/show_bug.cgi?id=69
> > 
> > You (Dag) broke compatibility with ATrpms two months ago and it would be
> > nice, if you would restore it. Thanks.

> On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 04:07:24AM +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> > But now that you brought it up, I'd rather have you remove my repository 
> > from your configuration than changing priorities at will without 
> > communication.
> > 
> > As a matter of fact, I thought my repository was disabled from your 
> > package like someone reported on this list. It would have been nice if you 
> > communicated these actions to me instead of making changes at will.
> 
> Sorry, Dag, but when I report a compatibility bug and you immediately
> close it a "WONTFIX" and "INVALID", there isn't much else I can do.

> > You know where to reach me privately if you want to discuss issues, I'm 
> > always open to resolve them in consensus.
> 
> What is worse, enforcing a policy by zero-tolelance methods like
> obsoleting packages from other repos, or discussing the problems in
> public?
> 
> Last comment from you on this was "Mark bug as UNDECIDED, DISCUSSION
> ON LIST".
> 
> I'd still like to ask you to fix the breakage, i.e. the explicit
> obsoletes, not the way you chose to package things. This does not mean
> you admit to any policy, just don't obsolete the ones used elsewhere.

On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 05:23:44PM +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
> Sure, use a proper naming convention like the rest of us. That's what you 
> could have done a year ago. You say it's me, I say it's you.
> 
> Now please stop harrassing me and feel free to remove my repository from 
> your apt configuration if you don't agree.

Let me understand you, first you complain about lack of communication,
when I remind you of the bugzilla entry above you go wild and don't
want any communication anymore, no, you even feel harassed?

That's a jump in the logic and very distructive community attitude!
It also surfaces the kind of communication we are having in private
for some months now.

All I asked was to stop breaking compatibility and you even verify
that you do so in order to promote your packaging policy on other
repos. That's against any spirit of interrepo coordination and
compatibility we commited ourselves to.

And for the record, the policy you try to promote, the way to
version/name packages including kernel modules was discussed at
repo-coord and was found to have serious design problems (merging
kernel and package versions/releases into a one-dimensional upgrade
path, breaking the latter).

Almost all repo maintainers involved with kernel module packaging
tried to convince you otherwise, and almost all (or all, but you?)
have the kernel version/release data in the name (of the rpm), which
is the only solid solution.

So not only are you using questionable methods to deploy your
policies, these are even considered flawed by the majority of
packagers. Not that it really matters, to be honest, because even if
your policies were out of gold and platinum your methods and tactics
are not community-friendly.

To get back to a constructive solution, which I still hope you are
susceptible to, please stop breaking interrepository compatibility for
the sake of "educational" purposes and if you feel your policies are
better than those of other repos, we have an open repo-coord list,
where you can bring this up again.

Moving this thread to the repo-coord list, where it belongs to.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/repo-coord/attachments/20040504/e8439144/attachment.bin