Re: [Gnu-arch-users] fedora core 2 will include subversion (and not gnu arch)

[Colin Walters]

On Sun, 2004-02-22 at 18:58, Tom Lord wrote:

> 1st: I hope not -- not in any narrow sense.  The occaisional "off
> topic" stuff is a Good Thing.  Arch is, as much as anything, both a
> technology enabling community in significant new ways and a sharp
> divergence from the style of technology generally recognized as
> interesting or important by the trade press.  The off-topic funkiness
> helps to build the kinds of _broader_ community that arch is meant to
> facilitate.  It _has_, in fact, drawn in new arch users.

Sure, but is that outweighed by the users who will stay away?  I suspect
in the long run it will be.

>   It _has_, in
> fact, helped at least some people to critically examine the Big
> Picture of how their labor as free software hackers relates to the
> rest of their world.

I agree that distributed revision control has an impact, but I think you
overestimate the uniqueness of Arch in that respect.

>   It _has_, in fact, led to some handy recipe
> exchanges, musical interest exchanges, and more.  I am against any
> kind of sterilization of g-a-u content to race to the bottom of some
> least common denominator level of content.

But it's precisely at the least common denominator where this list will
be most productive, because we will be working from our shared basis,
instead of spending our time on offtopic flamewars.

> (And it _has_, in fact, pissed off or otherwise offended a sufficient
> number of RH employees that they are, at least approximately,
> self-excluded as a group from the arch community.  But that's a good
> thing, in the long run.  

Wow.  That's an extraordinarily hostile and destructive point of view. 
I can't even think of how you can imagine this to be a good thing.

> Not because we don't want them in the
> community -- we do -- but because this contradiction between where
> they're at and where it makes sense for them to be is highlighted and
> explicitly presented to them.   Most people don't like to be
> hyporcites and making it harder for them to be so unconsciously is a
> libertarian approach to helping them out of that state.)

I think you'll find that most of them simply disagree with you.  You
have your opinion on Red Hat, and it's well known.  Not everyone shares
it.

> 2nd: the fedora flame is very far from off topic.  Technology (like
> arch) and social organization and economic patterns (like fedora)
> exist in a symbiotic relationship.   

I agree there is a relationship, but it's pretty tenuous.  Why don't you
create a new list, address@hidden or something, where this
relationship can be discussed.  gnu-arch-users would focus on achieving
technical goals and helping people, the same as every other project
development mailing list.  Users wouldn't get long vitriolic flames in
response to things like inquiries about packaging for a particular
distribution.

What happens when we get someone who hates SuSE with as much passion as
you do Red Hat on the list, and they respond to every thread about SuSE
packages with long rants?  Or Mandrake?  Or Debian?
 
> You can't fully grok why arch is
> good unless you can relate that to why fedora sucks.   You shouldn't
> resist wondering why anyone would design fedora in its current form if
> they grokked arch.
> 
> I think this 'ol thing is what to aim for:
> 
>   http://www.geocrawler.com/archives/3/324/2002/11/0/10076413/

Fine - then talk about it on gnu.misc.discuss.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part