On Tue, 7 May 2019 13:42:05 -0400 Eli Schwartz via aur-general <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 5/3/19 11:41 AM, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote: > > On Fri, 3 May 2019 11:32:57 -0400 > > Eli Schwartz via aur-general <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Apparently, he *really* thinks that that is a bad idea and an inferior > >> mesa-git experience. > >> > > > > And apparently the mesa developers disagree. Remember how this thread > > started. > > This logic is automatically invalid, no ifs ands or buts. > Your argument is that is makes for an unacceptable mesa experience. The experience intended by upstream is EXTREMELY valid. > Upstream developers *by definition* have different priorities from > downstream users. Furthermore, the world is full of projects run by > upstreams who have unrealistic and sometimes ridiculous expectations; > anyone who has packaged a lot of software should know this. > > If the mesa developers disagree, that's fine. But it doesn't actually > mean anything. What would mean something is their rationale for > disagreeing. Just like any other upstream software. So how upstream intends their software to work doesn't mean anything? Try again.
