Re: afterstep in redhat

Charlie Schmidt (ishamael@themes.org)
09 Dec 2000 23:23:49 EST


-

ill chime in then.
i dont think it should be completly the team's responsibility to provide rpms.
should we be held accountable for slackware .tgzs? debian .debs? stample .slps?

thats bull, we maintain a complete and easily packagable distribution of 
afterstep, why should we be responsible for tailoring to a linux distribution?


[Sat, 9 Dec 2000 23:00:53 -0500 (EST)] <c_lee11@yahoo.com> 

> On 8 Dec 2000, Doug Alcorn wrote:
>  
>  >
>  > Nathaniel, while I am interested in what RedHat does (or doesn't) do
>  > with AfterStep, the best forum for this is the as-users mailing list.
>  >
>  > Nathaniel Graham <npgraham@usa.net> writes:
>  >
>  > > Hello,
>  > > 	On the official afterstep page, it mentions that RedHat has removed afterstep
>  > > from it's distribution.  I recently contacted RedHat about that and my growing
>  > > list of issues with their distribution.  The response I received was:
>  > >
>  > > "As for packages no longer in the distribution, we drop packages when they
>  > > become too difficult to maintain. We do not have a huge development staff and
>  > > thus we rely heavily on the community to support and maintain various
>  > > packages. If there's a package that has been dropped that you feel we need,
>  > > pitch in and help maintain the code. We could then add it back into the
>  > > distribution." (I reformatted it, but it's otherwise verbatim).
>  > >
>  > > Now last I checked, the afterstep team has always made afterstep available in
>  > > rpm and srpm format.  What more maintainence do they need?  While she may have
>  > > been refering more specifically to some of the other packages I asked about,
>  > > afterstep was one of my biggest beefs (however, xv hasn't changed in forever,
>  > > so again, what maintainence could they need?).
>  > >
>  > > Any clarification you can provide would be appreciated.
>  > > Thanks for your time.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > Nathaniel Graham
>  > >
>  > > ____________________________________________________________________
>  > > Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
>  >
>  > Yes, AS has had problems with RedHat for quite some time.  I'm sure
>  > there are several on the as-users list who can chime in with stories.
>  > Most of the problems relate to their decision of which version of AS
>  > they ship.  One time they took (just like the recent gcc mess) one of
>  > our development snapshots (1.4.something) and called it 1.5.0.  Prior
>  > to that, they had built their own window manager out of fvwm and
>  > _called_ it AfterStep.  I think _it_ still ships with RedHat.  They
>  > now call it "AnotherLevel" (it would be interesting to know if anyone
>  > is using this).
>  >
>  > Other's may have differing opinions, but I say "good riddance."
>  >
>  
>  A lot of this can be blamed on the AS guys if you ask me. If you
>  didn't want Redhat shipping the development snapshots you should've
>  provided Redhat the rpm's of the version you wanted to be shipped.
>  
>  You really can't blame Redhat for something that's really a screwup on
>  AS part. A little forethought would've prevented the whole thing.
>  
>  As for the afterstep team has always made afterstep available in rpm
>  and srpm formats that's laughable. Check the date and version of the rpm
>  packages. If the AS guys can't be bothered to update the stuff on their
>  own WWW site, why should Redhat or any other distro do it?
>  
>  
>  
>  --------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, simply type the following at #
>  echo "unsubscribe as-users <your_email>" | mail majordomo@afterstep.org
>  
>  
>  

-- 
Charlie Schmidt - ishamael@themes.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, simply type the following at #
echo "unsubscribe as-users <your_email>" | mail majordomo@afterstep.org