[Mageia-dev] RPM5 AND MAGEIA
Per Øyvind Karlsen
peroyvind at mandriva.org
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
>> 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 ).
> It was also explained during one of the first meeting for packagers who
> asked :
> 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
unnecessary work without getting in the way for more important
since it will get harder to start address later on if suddenly then
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
>> 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 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
>> 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,
people not involved with upstream project at all has done on numerous
occations earlier though.. ;)
More information about the Mageia-dev