Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/27/2017 11:27 AM, NicoHood wrote: > Sorry Emulatorman, the majority of TUs did not vote for you. Maybe next > time. Thanks for your effort on linux-libre and other projects on AUR > and good luck for the future :) > > Nico > Don't worry Nico, thanks for your sponsorship and support, even all those TUs participated and voted too. :) Regards, André. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/19/2017 04:18 PM, NicoHood wrote: > On 05/13/2017 06:35 PM, André Silva wrote: >> Hi all, I'm André Silva (known as Emulatorman) that was one of main >> full-time Parabola devs between 2012-2017 [0] maintaining around 800 >> packages [1], mainly Linux-libre kernels and personal ones such as the >> Linux-libre in combination with Knock [2], Grsecurity+Knock [3]. I will >> happy to maintain some of my packages with the other TUs and my sponsor >> (nicohood) in [community]. >> >> The following packages that i would maintain are: >> >> * ath9k-htc-firmware >> * linux-libre-firmware >> * openfwwf >> * linux-libre >> * linux-libre-lts >> >> Regards, >> André Silva >> >> GPG ID: C92B AA71 3B8D 53D3 CAE6 3FC9 E697 4752 F970 4456 >> >> [0]:https://git.parabola.nu/hackers.git/tree/users/1007.yml >> [1]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-April/005094.html >> [2]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Knock >> [3]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Grsecurity%2BKnock >> > > The discussion period is over, please give your vote in the aurweb > Trusted User section: > https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=93 > Yes: 9 No: 27 Abstain: 6 Voted: 91.30% Result: Rejected Sorry Emulatorman, the majority of TUs did not vote for you. Maybe next time. Thanks for your effort on linux-libre and other projects on AUR and good luck for the future :) Nico signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/13/2017 06:35 PM, André Silva wrote: > Hi all, I'm André Silva (known as Emulatorman) that was one of main > full-time Parabola devs between 2012-2017 [0] maintaining around 800 > packages [1], mainly Linux-libre kernels and personal ones such as the > Linux-libre in combination with Knock [2], Grsecurity+Knock [3]. I will > happy to maintain some of my packages with the other TUs and my sponsor > (nicohood) in [community]. > > The following packages that i would maintain are: > > * ath9k-htc-firmware > * linux-libre-firmware > * openfwwf > * linux-libre > * linux-libre-lts > > Regards, > André Silva > > GPG ID: C92B AA71 3B8D 53D3 CAE6 3FC9 E697 4752 F970 4456 > > [0]:https://git.parabola.nu/hackers.git/tree/users/1007.yml > [1]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-April/005094.html > [2]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Knock > [3]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Grsecurity%2BKnock > The discussion period is over, please give your vote in the aurweb Trusted User section: https://aur.archlinux.org/tu/?id=93 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 18-05-17 18:25, André Silva wrote:
Otherwise, i won't maintain more packages than linux-libre{,-lts} and
free firmware in Arch since i have another personal projects too. So i
would just help maintain my kernels in [community] as my contribution
for all users who loves use it.
Andre.
to me it looks like those goals could be achieved with AUR packages and
an unofficial repo.
What other benefits would you becoming a TU bring for Arch Linux community ?
NOTE : i'm just an AL user
Lone_Wolf
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/18/2017 11:27 AM, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> André, would love to see your response to the questions from Eli and
> Brtln.
>
Hi Jelle, sorry about the delay to respond those emails, i didn't read
them until now :(
Here I go...
On 05/15/2017 11:12 AM, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
> On 2017-05-13 18:35, André Silva wrote:
>> * linux-libre
>> * linux-libre-lts
>
> The drama aside, why should we want to include a libre kernel in
> repositories, while as a whole, we don't really care about it? We
> package Flash, proprietary blobs for kernel, nvidia drivers, repackage
> projectsfrom prebuilt tarballs, pull non-free assets for games and so
> on. I really can't see this application in any other way than trying to
> annoy Parabola, even if you don't intend to be malicious.
>
> Bartłomiej
>
Hi Bartłomiej, i wouldn't try annoy Parabola and/or another distro, i
just would maintain linux-libre and linux-libre-lts plus free firmwares
in Arch for those users who loves uses it without blobs. Otherwise, it
will be helpful not only for Arch because Parabola and another distros
will benefit from it since they have a hard work making a lot of
packages [0], not just kernels, then it will save time for them to
maintain their projects too and it is a way to help to Arch and all
Arch-based distros with my contribution :)
[0]:https://git.parabola.nu/abslibre.git/tree/
On 05/15/2017 11:19 AM, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> On 05/13/17 at 11:35pm, André Silva wrote:
>> On 05/13/2017 10:24 PM, Christian Rebischke wrote:
>>> Hello Andre,
>>> Can you tell us more about your position at parabola? Why did you quit
>>> the developer job for there and why do you want to be Arch Linux
>>> Trusted User now? This is no offense, I just want to know more about
>>> that part in your history.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>
>> Hi Chris don't worry about your questions, it isn't a offense. :)
>
> Thanks for being so open about it, I appreciate it!
>
>> Currently, i'm dedicating my life to my family and friends than ever
>> before, however i would at least continuing maintaining some of my
>> kernels such as linux-libre and linux-libre-lts in Arch as TU in
>> [community] for the benefit of Arch the same as other Arch-based distros.
>
> Personally I have mixed feelings about yet another kernel in our
> repository's. I'm also wondering if you want to bring in more -libre
> packages? (And therfore making parabola obsolete).
>
> I'm fine with the current split between Arch and Parabola, since it
> makes it clear where Arch stands :)
>
Parabola is really more than a distro that only maintains/deblobs
kernels, you can see in their blacklist [0] and their project [1],
therefore it won't make Parabola obsolete, on the contrary, it will
benefit both (Arch and Parabola) and all Arch-based distros.
Otherwise, i won't maintain more packages than linux-libre{,-lts} and
free firmware in Arch since i have another personal projects too. So i
would just help maintain my kernels in [community] as my contribution
for all users who loves use it.
[0]:https://git.parabola.nu/blacklist.git/plain/blacklist.txt
[1]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Parabola_Social_Contract
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/15/17 at 11:14am, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote: > On 05/15/2017 10:43 AM, NicoHood wrote: > > Because there are people who don't use (much) proprietary software and > > still want to benefit from Arch. We are not only a free distribution but > > I think its a nice addition to have free kernels available. Also another > > kernel maintainer can make the normal kernel testing faster than it is > > now. I appreciate the work on free software and we should give users the > > freedom of choice. > > Not sure I understand this. > > Anyone who chooses to use a libre kernel is presumably doing so because > they believe in a moral argument against the use of proprietary blobs of > any sort. > It can be assumed that such a person doesn't want to use any of the > other proprietary blobs we ship in the repos... however, it is not as > though we somehow care about distinguishing between them, so anyone who > chooses to use our repos would have to do a fair amount of work to > *protect themselves against* the natural behavior of the Arch repos. > > Parabola already perfectly fulfills this role on behalf of its users, > and the only real benefit of shipping our own libre stuff is to give it > the official Arch stamp of approval and thereby permit such individuals > to receive support from the official Arch support Fora. > > > As far as kernels go, I don't see how shipping another kernel and > dividing our current users between 4 kernels instead of three kernels is > supposed to make testing and signoffs of the three we have right now, go > any faster. If anything, we will have some number less eyes on the stock > kernel, ensuring we are less likely to catch errors with its specific > configuration. > One doesn't need to have push access to the package repositories in > order to test the kernel... > > ... > > Obviously you all can do whatever you want, and maybe there are other > reasons to choose to include André Silva among your number. But from > where I am looking in from the sidelines, I simply don't see what > non-Parabola-specific *values* he intends to bring with him to enhance > the Arch Linux experience. > > (From the Wiki) > The minimum requirements to becoming a TU are as follows: > ... > a general idea of the kind of packages you want to maintain > (basically, why do you want to become TU?) > > If the answer to that question is merely "to subsume and obsolete > Parabola", then I suddenly start being confused about the general > direction of the Arch Linux project. > > I feel sure I must be missing something, somewhere, somehow... > > -- > Eli Schwartz > André, would love to see your response to the questions from Eli and Brtln. -- Jelle van der Waa signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/15/2017 10:43 AM, NicoHood wrote: > Because there are people who don't use (much) proprietary software and > still want to benefit from Arch. We are not only a free distribution but > I think its a nice addition to have free kernels available. Also another > kernel maintainer can make the normal kernel testing faster than it is > now. I appreciate the work on free software and we should give users the > freedom of choice. Not sure I understand this. Anyone who chooses to use a libre kernel is presumably doing so because they believe in a moral argument against the use of proprietary blobs of any sort. It can be assumed that such a person doesn't want to use any of the other proprietary blobs we ship in the repos... however, it is not as though we somehow care about distinguishing between them, so anyone who chooses to use our repos would have to do a fair amount of work to *protect themselves against* the natural behavior of the Arch repos. Parabola already perfectly fulfills this role on behalf of its users, and the only real benefit of shipping our own libre stuff is to give it the official Arch stamp of approval and thereby permit such individuals to receive support from the official Arch support Fora. As far as kernels go, I don't see how shipping another kernel and dividing our current users between 4 kernels instead of three kernels is supposed to make testing and signoffs of the three we have right now, go any faster. If anything, we will have some number less eyes on the stock kernel, ensuring we are less likely to catch errors with its specific configuration. One doesn't need to have push access to the package repositories in order to test the kernel... ... Obviously you all can do whatever you want, and maybe there are other reasons to choose to include André Silva among your number. But from where I am looking in from the sidelines, I simply don't see what non-Parabola-specific *values* he intends to bring with him to enhance the Arch Linux experience. (From the Wiki) The minimum requirements to becoming a TU are as follows: ... a general idea of the kind of packages you want to maintain (basically, why do you want to become TU?) If the answer to that question is merely "to subsume and obsolete Parabola", then I suddenly start being confused about the general direction of the Arch Linux project. I feel sure I must be missing something, somewhere, somehow... -- Eli Schwartz signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/15/2017 01:12 PM, Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote: > On 2017-05-13 18:35, André Silva wrote: >> * linux-libre >> * linux-libre-lts > > The drama aside, why should we want to include a libre kernel in > repositories, while as a whole, we don't really care about it? We > package Flash, proprietary blobs for kernel, nvidia drivers, repackage > projectsfrom prebuilt tarballs, pull non-free assets for games and so > on. I really can't see this application in any other way than trying to > annoy Parabola, even if you don't intend to be malicious. > > Bartłomiej > Because there are people who don't use (much) proprietary software and still want to benefit from Arch. We are not only a free distribution but I think its a nice addition to have free kernels available. Also another kernel maintainer can make the normal kernel testing faster than it is now. I appreciate the work on free software and we should give users the freedom of choice. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/13/17 at 11:35pm, André Silva wrote: > On 05/13/2017 10:24 PM, Christian Rebischke wrote: > > Hello Andre, > > Can you tell us more about your position at parabola? Why did you quit > > the developer job for there and why do you want to be Arch Linux > > Trusted User now? This is no offense, I just want to know more about > > that part in your history. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Chris > > > > Hi Chris don't worry about your questions, it isn't a offense. :) Thanks for being so open about it, I appreciate it! > Currently, i'm dedicating my life to my family and friends than ever > before, however i would at least continuing maintaining some of my > kernels such as linux-libre and linux-libre-lts in Arch as TU in > [community] for the benefit of Arch the same as other Arch-based distros. Personally I have mixed feelings about yet another kernel in our repository's. I'm also wondering if you want to bring in more -libre packages? (And therfore making parabola obsolete). I'm fine with the current split between Arch and Parabola, since it makes it clear where Arch stands :) -- Jelle van der Waa signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 2017-05-13 18:35, André Silva wrote: > * linux-libre > * linux-libre-lts The drama aside, why should we want to include a libre kernel in repositories, while as a whole, we don't really care about it? We package Flash, proprietary blobs for kernel, nvidia drivers, repackage projectsfrom prebuilt tarballs, pull non-free assets for games and so on. I really can't see this application in any other way than trying to annoy Parabola, even if you don't intend to be malicious. Bartłomiej signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/13/2017 10:24 PM, Christian Rebischke wrote: > Hello Andre, > Can you tell us more about your position at parabola? Why did you quit > the developer job for there and why do you want to be Arch Linux > Trusted User now? This is no offense, I just want to know more about > that part in your history. > > Best regards, > > Chris > Hi Chris don't worry about your questions, it isn't a offense. :) I was one of the full-time Parabola devs there, mainly i've been maintaining around 90% packages in libre repo [0] and 100% in kernels [1] and nonprism repos [2][3] for x86_64 and i686 only, except the kernels packages that were maintained by me for all architectures supported by Parabola (x86_64, i686 and armv7h). However a couple days ago, i've posted an email in Parabola's dev lists about some doubts related to Parabola'd donations [4] For constants multiple personal attacks (ad hominem), but no substance [5], causing an unnecessary division and this on going flamewar over something that should have been simple, i've decided to say goodbye to Parabola [6] Currently, i'm dedicating my life to my family and friends than ever before, however i would at least continuing maintaining some of my kernels such as linux-libre and linux-libre-lts in Arch as TU in [community] for the benefit of Arch the same as other Arch-based distros. Regards, André [0]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Repositories#libre [1]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Repositories#kernels [2]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Repositories#nonprism [3]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Nonprism [4]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-April/004848.html [5]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-April/004954.html [6]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-April/005022.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 04:35:37PM +, André Silva wrote: > Hi all, I'm André Silva (known as Emulatorman) that was one of main > full-time Parabola devs between 2012-2017 [0] maintaining around 800 > packages [..] Hello Andre, Can you tell us more about your position at parabola? Why did you quit the developer job for there and why do you want to be Arch Linux Trusted User now? This is no offense, I just want to know more about that part in your history. Best regards, Chris signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] TU Application: André Silva
On 05/13/2017 06:35 PM, André Silva wrote: > Hi all, I'm André Silva (known as Emulatorman) that was one of main > full-time Parabola devs between 2012-2017 [0] maintaining around 800 > packages [1], mainly Linux-libre kernels and personal ones such as the > Linux-libre in combination with Knock [2], Grsecurity+Knock [3]. I will > happy to maintain some of my packages with the other TUs and my sponsor > (nicohood) in [community]. > > The following packages that i would maintain are: > > * ath9k-htc-firmware > * linux-libre-firmware > * openfwwf > * linux-libre > * linux-libre-lts > > Regards, > André Silva > > GPG ID: C92B AA71 3B8D 53D3 CAE6 3FC9 E697 4752 F970 4456 > > [0]:https://git.parabola.nu/hackers.git/tree/users/1007.yml > [1]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-April/005094.html > [2]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Knock > [3]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Grsecurity%2BKnock > I confirm the sponsorship of Emulatorman. Let the discussion period begin. Good luck! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
