On Thursday 11 March 2010 00:01:58 Paul Mattal wrote: > My understanding of our patching philosophy is: > > 1) Don't patch if doing so makes us un-vanilla. Users familiar with > the standard behavior of software should be able to rely on our > packaged versions to behave the same way. > > 2) If there's some major roadblock (crash, hang, data loss, chronic > incompatibility), apply a reasonable patch as a workaround, as long > as this kind of patch for this kind of problem has not been rejected > upstream. Report the bug and patch upstream, and remove the patch > from our package when upstream integrates a fix. > > 3) We don't maintain upstream software; we should not do a lot of > work to patch unmaintained software. I am totally agree with these rules. I don't like to patch software to provides this or that feature, but we need to patch a software that does not work due a bug fixed upstream.
People can edit and rebuild packages using ABS and/or AUR. "Arch was made to work with you, not for you" [A. Griffin] :) -- Andrea
