4 ms·
They do not. Even the vast majority of Arch users thinks the policy of "integrate breakage anyway and post the warning on the web changelog" is pants-on-head in
by jorvi 2y ago
They do not. Even the vast majority of Arch users thinks the policy of "integrate breakage anyway and post the warning on the web changelog" is pants-on-head insane, especially compared to something like SUSE Tumbleweed (also a rolling distro) where things get tested and will stay staged if broken.
- loeg 2y ago> They do not. I present to you sibling comment posted slightly before yours: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43655093 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43655093 They do.
- jorvi 2y agoNo, they do not. No sane person would say "I would rather integrate a package with a breaking change without explicit build warning / deprecation".
- loeg 2y agoYou're the one who has added "breaking." The original claim was just that integrators get hate for not keeping up with upstreams, which is true. Many changes aren't breaking; and users don't know which ones are or aren't anyway.
- jorvi 2y agoNo, your claim was that integrators get hate for not immediately integrating upstream changes. Which is patently false, because users would rather have the packages tested for breaking changes and either patched or have a deprecation warning, rather than having the changes blindly integrated and having their legs pulled out from under them by a breaking change. No one is hating on distro packagers for taking a slight delay to verify and test things. I brought up Arch because they get a lot of hate for exactly doing that and consequently pulling people's legs out from under them.
- loeg 2y agoThe existence of some users desiring stability does not in any way contradict the claim that maintainers get hate for not immediately integrating upstream changes. In particular, distros have more than 2 users -- they can do different things.