On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:31 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Arvid Picciani wrote:
>> Let me quote "the arch way 2.0" which has a very nice condensed statement
>> that does in fact support minimalism:
>
> Nice... so not the original Arch Way as defined by Judd that you keep
> referring to... For those t
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 14:15 +0100, ludovic coues wrote:
> > None at all.
> >
> >
>
> > Now i'm running xmonad, with a mix of gui (gimp,inkscape,browser) and non
> > gui
> >
>
>
> My english wasn't one of the best, but isn't a windows manager the same
> thing as a desktop ?
>
Nope, a WM manages
> None at all.
>
>
> Now i'm running xmonad, with a mix of gui (gimp,inkscape,browser) and non
> gui
>
My english wasn't one of the best, but isn't a windows manager the same
thing as a desktop ?
--
Cordialement, Coues Ludovic
06 148 743 42
--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/
Piyush P Kurur wrote:
I am curious. What desktop do you use Arvid ?
None at all.
I used one of these desktops (kde3) a few years ago because terminals
started to age and lack modern features.
But then the antidesktop movement has lifted keyboard centric user
experience to a modern level,
On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 10:30:57AM +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
[snip]
>> Systems evolve and grow, and the desktop
>> does as well, thankfully.
>
> And thankfully they grow beyond your gnome/kde world :)
>
>
I am curious. What desktop do you use Arvid ?
Regards
ppk
Am Wed, 02 Dec 2009 10:35:59 +0100
schrieb Arvid Picciani :
> Heiko Baums wrote:
>
> > There is a second option regarding your dbus/wpa_supplicant example.
> > Why not file a bug report/feature request to upstream of
> > networkmanager to remove dbus from it? Of course you need to file
> > this b
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 10:30 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> > Simplicity isn't a hammer with which to attack every package that
> > doesn't conform to minimalism by your definition.
>
> Yes you can. Otherwise what is there difference between arch and ubuntu
> or whatever your pr
Heiko Baums wrote:
There is a second option regarding your dbus/wpa_supplicant example.
Why not file a bug report/feature request to upstream of networkmanager
to remove dbus from it? Of course you need to file this bug
report/feature request to upstream of every package which depends on
dbus. A
Arvid Picciani wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
I personally think your mis-reading the "Arch Way". We do not patch
to add features that are not supported upstream but I have never seen
anything mentioned about using minimal configure flags.
Let me quote "the arch way 2.0" which has a very nice c
Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
Design simplicity? How is --enable-dbus less simple than --disable-dbus
or the equivalents?
My argument was "--enable-dbus" vs "" ie the defaults.
Simplicity isn't a hammer with which to attack every package that
doesn't conform to minimalism by your definition.
Yes you
Am Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:13:59 +0100
schrieb Arvid Picciani :
> please comment on: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17346
>
> summary:
>
> 1) I suggested reverting the dbus configure
> flag to upstream default.
>
> 2) Jan de Groot closed the bug with WONTFIX
> since this revert WILL break
>
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 10:11 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
>
> Let me quote "the arch way 2.0" which has a very nice condensed
> statement that does in fact support minimalism:
>
> "
> without unnecessary additions, modifications, or complications
>
> Simplicity is the primary principle. All oth
Allan McRae wrote:
While I am at it, lets see why your arguements just grepping for
"enable|disable" etc are idiotic. Take the gcc PKGBUILD:
i have pointed out myself that those do not form a valid argument.
Trying to disprove my other points by doing that _again_ does not work.
I personally
Arvid Picciani wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
Can you actually point out what is broken with dbus? That would
actually clarify why you want it removed from cups, because as I
commented in that bug report, the only advantage I see there is saving
4Mb of deps off your system.
I'm aware that mini
Allan McRae wrote:
Can you actually point out what is broken with dbus? That would
actually clarify why you want it removed from cups, because as I
commented in that bug report, the only advantage I see there is saving
4Mb of deps off your system.
I'm aware that minimalism is not a valid a
Jan de Groot wrote:
> Ah, so my intent is to put dbus support in every possible package in
> the repository.
This is in fact what i claim.
> Am I convicted now? What's the sentence?
That you read and reflect on the ideas archlinux was built on.
One of your
removed patches is one that integ
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 09:18 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Jan de Groot wrote:
> >> Now you're propably saying numbers of downstream decisions doesn't say
> >> anything. Very true, which is why i prefer arguing about "intent"
> >>
> >> a...@andariel: ~ grep Maintainer /var/abs/core/dbus-core/PKGBU
Arvid Picciani wrote:
Jan de Groot wrote:
Dbus support in wpa-supplicant is not broken. A not working
networkmanager is broken. We have to make a choice here, and having
broken software isn't the right choice, is it?
dbus is indeed broken. so its a different tradeof then you suggest.
Additio
On 02/12/09 07:38, Arvid Picciani wrote:
Ray Kohler wrote:
What I personally am in support of, in the general case, is
"suckless.org-style" minimalism, rather than following upstream's
direction. So if upstream changes the default to enable the hal and
dbus bits, I will then be in favor of Arch
Jan de Groot wrote:
Dbus support in wpa-supplicant is not broken. A not working
networkmanager is broken. We have to make a choice here, and having
broken software isn't the right choice, is it?
dbus is indeed broken. so its a different tradeof then you suggest.
Additionaly, i don't intent t
Jan de Groot wrote:
Now you're propably saying numbers of downstream decisions doesn't say
anything. Very true, which is why i prefer arguing about "intent"
a...@andariel: ~ grep Maintainer /var/abs/core/dbus-core/PKGBUILD
# Maintainer: Jan de Groot
and "bias"
So, just because I'm the maint
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 09:13 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Arvid Picciani wrote:
> > Aaron Griffin wrote:
>
> >> If you have legitimate, actionable fixes for anything you take issue
> >> with, please post them to the bug tracker. Until then, this is just
> >> hot air.
> >
> > I take that as an in
Arvid Picciani wrote:
Aaron Griffin wrote:
If you have legitimate, actionable fixes for anything you take issue
with, please post them to the bug tracker. Until then, this is just
hot air.
I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to
the arch way. If this turns ou
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 23:51 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>
> > Which package has patches to add these features? Looking at
> > xorg-server, I only see one extraneous patch that simple replaces the
> > default grey stipple pattern with black. The rest seem (at a glance)
>
Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
All this 'fork this fork that' threatening is really quite sad.
A fork is not a "threat". It's a suggestion to resolve problems outside
the current project politics. I can't see why anyone would be offended
by this.
I know
its common in open source and linux in particul
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 08:38 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Ray Kohler wrote:
>
> > What I personally am in support of, in the general case, is
> > "suckless.org-style" minimalism, rather than following upstream's
> > direction.
> > So if upstream changes the default to enable the hal and
> > dbus
Ray Kohler wrote:
What I personally am in support of, in the general case, is
"suckless.org-style" minimalism, rather than following upstream's
direction.
So if upstream changes the default to enable the hal and
dbus bits, I will then be in favor of Arch disabling them, and we'll
be in disagre
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Ray Kohler wrote:
>>
>> 2009/12/1 Ng Oon-Ee :
>>>
>>> When I started on here the mantra was "Arch is what you make it".
>>> Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible
>>> (without breaking) and provide the utility expe
Ray Kohler wrote:
2009/12/1 Ng Oon-Ee :
When I started on here the mantra was "Arch is what you make it".
Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible
(without breaking) and provide the utility expected of such packages. Of
course, if you want a system without hal/dbus, the
2009/12/1 Ng Oon-Ee :
> When I started on here the mantra was "Arch is what you make it".
> Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible
> (without breaking) and provide the utility expected of such packages. Of
> course, if you want a system without hal/dbus, there's ABS and
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
>>>
>>> I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to
>>> the
>>> arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add
On 02.12.2009 00:22, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 00:03 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
>
>> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>>> If you have legitimate, actionable fixes for anything you take issue
>>> with, please post them to the bug tracker. Until then, this is just
>>> hot air.
>>>
Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the
arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to
the next iteration.
Assuming you meant "packages to the tracker th
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Giovanni Scafora wrote:
>>
>> 2009/12/1, Ng Oon-Ee :
>>>
>>> When I started on here the mantra was "Arch is what you make it".
>>> Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible
>>> (without breaking) and provide the ut
Giovanni Scafora wrote:
2009/12/1, Ng Oon-Ee :
When I started on here the mantra was "Arch is what you make it".
Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible
(without breaking) and provide the utility expected of such packages. Of
course, if you want a system without ha
2009/12/1, Ng Oon-Ee :
> When I started on here the mantra was "Arch is what you make it".
> Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible
> (without breaking) and provide the utility expected of such packages. Of
> course, if you want a system without hal/dbus, there's ABS
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 00:03 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > If you have legitimate, actionable fixes for anything you take issue
> > with, please post them to the bug tracker. Until then, this is just
> > hot air.
>
> I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the
> arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to
> the next iteration.
Assuming you meant "packages to the tracker that DON'T adhere to
Giovanni Scafora wrote:
2009/12/1, Arvid Picciani :
I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the
arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to
the next iteration.
is this a threat? :-)
if patches are lethal, YES :D
--
Arvid
Asg
2009/12/1, Arvid Picciani :
> I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the
> arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to
> the next iteration.
is this a threat? :-)
--
Arch Linux Developer
http://www.archlinux.org
http://www.archli
Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
...stuff...
Not sure what just happened here. I thought we were having a
legitimate discussion about xorg-server and this ballooned into
something crazy.
You wanted detailed proof, here you are.
i doubt you have gra
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> ...stuff...
Not sure what just happened here. I thought we were having a
legitimate discussion about xorg-server and this ballooned into
something crazy. Apparently, you've been holding onto this for some
time.
If you have legitimate, actio
42 matches
Mail list logo
