Felipe Contreras wrote: > James Denholm wrote: > > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 05:39:42PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > (...) I would venture to say you have never made a package in your > > > life. > > > > And you have, Felipe? Let us see the years of experience you surely have > > in the field. > > As a matter of fact, yes I've written many packages, for Debian, Fedora, > ArchLinux, and others. Even Windows installers. I'd hardly say that a few PKGBUILDs count. I've written some myself, not hard to do. That said, if I had realised you were going to discuss such a trivial thing - _making_ packages rather than _maintaining_ them in a repo - I'd have dismissed your statement as mere idiotic vitriol. Do you honestly think that Junio has _never made a package?_ Never, on any of the systems he's ever touched, run makepkg or debuild or whathaveyou? I could be wrong here, but I'm fairly sure that Junio is a *nix software developer of some kind or another. You know, given that he's the maintainer of git, kinda might be the case. And I really doubt that any *nix dev, _anywhere_, could have _any_ sort of success without looking sideways once or twice at a package builder, given that pre-release homebrewing of expected packages is only an absolutely critical part of testing. Come on, man. Don't be silly. > But that's a red herring. Even if was the worst packager in history, > that doesn't make Junio's decision any more correct. No, but it would render your bizarre, tantrum-like accusations as generally baseless. I mean, I don't think anyone actually puts weight on them anyway, but hey, never hurts to shine a spotlight on nonsense. > > > The fact that you think packagers of git would simply package > > > git-remote-hg/bzr as well is pretty appalling. > > > > It's not an outlandish thought, in fact, I'd suggest it as probable - > > provided that they find the projects to be stable and of high quality. > > Do you want to bet? Not a betting man. However, ignoring that for a moment, I doubt we'd be able to agree on checks and balances for the case where git-remote-hg/bzr were rejected due to the code being of poor quality or unstable. So no, I won't bet, because you hold your own work and opinions as sacrosanct and infallible. > > You, or someone else, might have to tap them on the shoulder and play > > nice to _ensure_ they know about them (after all, we all know that > > packagers _never_ read READMEs, do they), but you're capable of that, > > I'm sure. > > In my experience packagers scratch their own itches, and if > git-remote-hg/bzr are not their itch, I don't see why any amount of > nice poking would make them package them. Some other packager would have > to do it, not the Git packagers. If there's a demand, Felipe, and the build process is sane, I can't see why they wouldn't. Package maintainers are aware they provide a service to their distributions. If you really want, poke them _with_ the majority of the necessary work done, hand them the PKGBUILDs/whathaveyou yourself. Pre-scratch the itch if you really feel they won't care. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html