Hi On 28/06/2019 18:13, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
Am Freitag, 28. Juni 2019, 02:59:50 CEST schrieb Simon Lees:
On 27/06/2019 23:07, Michal Suchánek wrote:
So why don't you as release engineers use OBS to tell you which patch was added and removed when?
OBS's ability to search history is poor to non existent atleast from the webui, where as its quite quick and simple to open the changelog in your browser and hit ctrl+f. I didn't try using obs to search for a patch for rather a long time, so there is a chance its better, but thats just my past experience.
So, this nicely resembles this issues grounds. Due to technical deficits, the system pushes the burden to handle those deficits on the shoulders of packagers/contributors, up to a level, where it *actively* scares them away (due to inflexibility).
Such technology defeats its purpose.
Where other projects harvest this result due to human incompetence (to cooperate, demonstrate respect, show empathy) like Debian or the Linux Kernel, we do that with numb scripts and numb policy.
Either you come up with technology, that *replaces* contributors, or adjust the technology to cooperate with the hands, that it feeds (on an acceptable level).
With all due respect, but if I would have to weight the proponents and opponents in this discussion on pure technical grounds, I would weight Seifes' contributions much higher, than those of the proponents. Of course , I'm biased. I'm just a poor openSUSE packager. You proponents might do other valuable work for the project, but from a packager perspective, I see Seifes' contributions everywhere...
See, the plain result of this stiff policy is: we lost the maintainer of a subsystem, that isn't very popular, but for those, that use it, it is *essential*. Again, I'm using VDR since 15 years, and guess what, always with openSUSE and its predecessors. I had painful times, translating the debian builds to something palatable for rpm.
If nobody steps up, I will take (co-)maintainership of the vdr project, but I would prefer to keep it in the project area and remove it from the distribution, as Stefan strives, since I'm surely not able to sustain the load.
It's poor and sad to see, that humanity was defeated by stiff technology/ policy. In fact, like it or not, all humans (who care about openSUSE), suffer from a net loss here. (Read Seifes' signature again)
As someone who works on SUSE's packaging team and therefore does a lot of packaging, i'm going to broadly disagree with this. In my eyes these standards and guidelines are no different to software projects that have coding style guidelines. These are common across both commercial and open source projects and its almost impossible to find one that everyone agrees with 100% because much of it is personal taste but people put there personal taste aside to create a uniform set of rules. Sure occasionally they alienate people who can't stand to put there personal style and preference aside to use what the project has decided on but many projects see the uniformity that these rules bring as a bigger upside. Like openSUSE's bots its quite common for these rules to be enforced by git commit hooks or git integration hooks that block merging requests that don't comply. So in short this is common practice in many projects, in each of those you will find people that think the way its done is dumb in some ways but accept such things as the cost of making everything somewhat unified. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org