2010/9/7 Ng Oon-Ee <[email protected]>: > On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 08:17 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: >> 2010/9/6 Ng Oon-Ee <[email protected]>: >> > On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 10:11 -0500, Brad Fanella wrote: >> >> 2010/9/6 Sven-Hendrik Haase <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> > On 06.09.2010 08:42, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: >> >> > > On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 21:03 -0400, Loui Chang wrote: >> >> > >> On Sun 05 Sep 2010 22:49 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: >> >> > >>> Arch TUs are generally considered to be the ultimate nightmare >> >> of any >> >> > >>> upstream maintainer. We come in the night, nagging with patches >> >> until >> >> > >>> all known upstream problems are fixed. >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> Do not stop trying to get your patches into upstream. >> >> > >> Hell yeah! >> >> > >> >> >> > > Sven-Hendrik's post should be plastered on the wall of every TU >> >> (and >> >> > > Arch user, actually) =) >> >> > > >> >> > > Any objections to putting the quote in its entirety on the wiki >> >> for TUs? >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > None at all. :) >> >> > >> >> >> >> I was actually planning on making that my forum signature! :-P >> >> However, that >> >> is crucial information and needs to be included in the wiki. >> > >> > Done. May need polishing =) >> > >> > http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#The_TU.27s_mission_statement >> >> Sorry, but however awesome Sven is, that kind of content does not fit >> in that page. I have slightly changed the wording of the introductory >> paragraph for the "desired effect"; see wiki diff. > > Understood =). The comment is still awesome though. Would it be > acceptable for 'communicating with and sending patches upstream as > needed' to contain a link to the ML post?
Sure. In fact, since there are no other examples I can recall for the sake of citation, that _was_ my intention (which somehow skipped my keyboard).
