9 ms·
this strongly reminds me of the hn post from five days back in which the main thread talked at some length about a very similar scenario > "He missed a big on
by proctor 7y ago
this strongly reminds me of the hn post from five days back in which the main thread talked at some length about a very similar scenario
> "He missed a big one: you have no way to stop Linux distributions from hacking up your software, and you'll suffer the consequences of whatever they do."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19935648 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19935648
- chubot 7y agoYeah I thought of the same comment. That is unfortunate. Maybe Debian is more respectful since it's open source not backed by a company with enterprise customers?
- bonzini 7y agoNot really, remember the ssh key fiasco which was also due to a Debian-only patch. (Disclaimer: I work for Red Hat)
- raverbashing 7y ago"respectful" as in let's wait years for a maintainer to come up with a solution and when we try to propose our own the maintainer trows a fit and turns it down?
- dagwieers 7y agoIs that what happened? I remember it differently...
- mattdm 7y agoEh. Although we don't always do things perfectly, Fedora has a pretty strong policy of working with upstreams first. By contrast in my personal experience as a developer of something that got packaged in Debian, I discovered later that that package had a bunch of patches added, a man page written (!) and so on, none of which was bad, but also none of which was fed back to me at all. (In case not obvious: I work for Red Hat on Fedora.)