Just my humble opinion on some of the issues raised:
What Arch needs is to have strict guidelines on PKGBUILDs and kick out
any developers that don't have the same idea. A proposition:
* Patches are unacceptable unless in the case the software wouldn't work
*at all* (Hint, qt PKGBUILD)
+1
PLEASE no more patches that just add functionality! I want VANILLA
packages and that's one reason I chose Arch. The users should complain
to the specific application's developers for missing functionality and
bugs.
If arch returns to "the arch way" please remind me to post a list of
packages with superfluous patches applied...
* Bugs and other issues that come from upstream, _should be fixed
upstream_. If people do have problems with a certain issue, they can abs
and makepkg themselves. (See rule 1)
+1
Another point of interest may be that many people used to find gnome
coming "ugly" by default (I don't know if this still the case). So what?
Selecting your own theme is just a few mouse clicks away. Arch should
never come with a fscked up KDE or Gnome profile like Ubuntu and others
do. In fact, packages should *always* come with the defaults shipped by
upstream.
+1
Again I like respecting the application's developers choices.
Dimitris
