On 12.03.2013 14:30, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 12/03/2013 12:01, Yuri K. Shatroff wrote:
Following your logic, if there's even one tool to make life easier
everything has to be absolutely easy. So we should now utilize fancy
wizards? Once again, that's following your logic.
not "has to be easy", but definitely, with such purpose.
Do you disagree? Perhaps you reckon that the whole purpose of computing
is to make life harder? :)
You know, this general topic rears it's head about every six months. The
answer never changes:
Gentoo is what it is, it works a certain way for a reason. Maybe you
like it, maybe you don't. Either way that is not going to change anytime
soon. What you could do is pitch in and do all the same heavy lifting
that our long-term devs have done, and be the change you want to see in
the world.
That might involve dealing with the protestations of the existing devs
though and they will likely quote the "Gentoo is what it is" line.
So, who argues? Gentoo is what it is just like everything is.
I only don't see in that fact any reason for driving off users when they
find issues.
One could say: oh crap, it's an issue, or more probably, "okay we note
that and get it fixed in a couple of <our free time units>"
Instead people immediately take on the face of almighty gods, and start
a long talk about what gentoo is, spending their own time, and others'
time (who read it) for just saying not too meaningful, if quite
meaningless "it is what it is" (with some perceived connotation "you
fool it's not your business").
You think I want to change the concept, the design, or any feature of
the software, or to have it changed. But I humbly don't want anything
except perhaps a little different attitude toward the user.
Please forgive me if I said that not quite clearly.
I think you just don't understand the group and technical dynamics that
are at work here. Gentoo is not a product, it's a tool kit. Nobody ever
claimed that drivers moving in and out of 3rd party vendor space to and
from mainline would be tracked and dealt with and documented. It is up
to the user to track that and decide what they want to use. It is the
user that must be aware of possible incompatibilities between his chosen
packages and deal with the results. A Gentoo system cannot possibly work
any other way - you built the thing using provided tools, deal with th
result of your creation.
Is it a design problem or a big change of principles to fix a package to
check kernel compatibility? (in this case)
Is it impossible or too hard to fix?
Is confirming an issue or fixing it a stain on the reputation of yours,
gentoo, linux or whatsoever?
Is that petty issue worth so long a discussion about the philosophy of
gentoo vs <your_unfavorite_OS>? :)
I can understand that it is not possible to track everything and that
there are more important things to do. But I can not imagine one
protesting against an improvement on the sole base that "we are not
<your_unfavorite_OS>" :)
I don't deny user's responsibility for what he's doing. But I don't see
a reason not to improve a package after a user found an issue and thank
him for that (at least not blaming him) :)
But please don't count as if I was demanding something, these were but
philosophical questions. :)
I don't see why you are getting so upset. The OP asked a question, he
got an answer. He seems OK with it, so why are you getting offended on
his behalf?
In no way. I don't know if it is my English that sounds to you so
differently from what I'm trying to say.
What I could be upset with, is that this story is turning into attacks
on me which have no basis except misunderstanding.
I only have to repeat that I thought the words said to the OP a little
harsh and wanted to defend him because everyone once gets into such a
situation for the first time, and experience is what had been needed
most when you hadn't it :) so that he wouldn't take it too hard :)
I only wanted to reconcile everyone and instead got blamed myself. But
that's quite common, so I'm not upset even with that :) I hope I have
not insulted anyone either.
--
Best wishes,
Yuri K. Shatroff
