Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-bugs (3912 mails)

< Previous Next >
[Bug 912611] alpine tries and fails to rsh to IMAP server
  • From: bugzilla_noreply@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 17:54:36 +0000
  • Message-id: <bug-912611-21960-W7k9DinZTS@http.bugzilla.novell.com/>
http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912611

--- Comment #31 from Eduardo Chappa <chappa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ---
The way that this bug was "solved" shows, again, that OpenSUSE is more a
collection of developers which put together s distribution, in independent
ways, rather than aas a "it makes sense" distribution. When one developer can
override decisions on a package that is not his, it is wrong, unless OpenSUSE
as a whole agrees (that is, all involved developers in this case agreed to it).
This is a case where agreements were not seeked.

Do you want to know another? OpenSUSE removed /etc/mailcap, and solved a
"problem" with seamonkey the wrong way. The developer thought /etc/mailcap was
not needed, and so alpine and mutt users do not have such file. In many ways
/etc/mailcap is like /etc/pine.conf, except that its defaults are much more
useful.

Do you want another? Look at Bug 462256, where someone decided to set the
default url-viewer to a browser that only displays a page, but cannot follow
links. Again, someone decided that this was useful, and affected many users. In
this case, since someone else removed /etc/mailcap, the bug is not valid
anymore. That is just silly.

I am sure there are others.

You (OpenSUSE developers) need to understand that your packages are not
independent of each other. A configuration package should be overseen by
someone who has an understanding of which packages are affected by that
package, and how they are affected. Jan, you have the best intentions, but a
label of "package suggested" seems to be taken by you as a shield and
permission for you to do anything you want, and that is not right, you are
ignoring the common good, and as a distributor, that should be your main
concern. Jan, even the original poster understood that your solution was not
such and uninstalled your package because of the too many changes you are
making. People are thinking that the changes were made to Alpine, not that
configuration options were added by another package. Does that make sense?

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
< Previous Next >