Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#13862 - Tuz instead of Arch logo for one kernel release?

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Cristian C. (ckristi) - Wednesday, 18 March 2009, 22:43 GMT
Last edited by Allan McRae (Allan) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 13:16 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To Tobias Powalowski (tpowa)
Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Thomas B├Ąchler (brain0)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 10
Private No

Details

Hi.

I just had an idea, being inspired from here http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzE1MA and here http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=67844.

What do you (the developers) think about removing the patch that replaces Tux with the Arch Logo in the kernel for the 2.6.29 release, so that we'll support the tasmanian devil aswell?
I think it would be a nice thing to do for this kernel release.

If anyone wants to support this idea, please vote. :-)
This task depends upon

Closed by  Allan McRae (Allan)
Thursday, 19 March 2009, 13:16 GMT
Reason for closing:  Deferred
Additional comments about closing:  Decision deferred until 2.6.29 released...
Comment by Pierre Schmitz (Pierre) - Wednesday, 18 March 2009, 23:54 GMT
No offense, but I don't think this is of any use. Arch shouldn't be abused to distribute any political, social or whatever unrelated statement. We could add "Fight Aids", "Save mother earth" or whatever signs. This is all important and should be supported; but that's not our mission. We are about free software: nothing more or less.

Don't get me wrong. Saving such animals is great, that's for sure. But I won't feel comfrtable to choose which campaign we should support "this week". But that shouldn't be our business.

I am really happy that there are people supporting such campaigns; but this is not really the right place.
Comment by Phillip Smith (fukawi2) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 00:03 GMT
I'm not the fussed about the "support X campaign" (seriously, what is the market value of advertising on someones kernel boot logo?).

I just think it would be nice and a bit of fun to mix it up :)
Comment by Cristian C. (ckristi) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 00:09 GMT
I respect your opinion, but I think a feature request should abuse no developer. That's why this option even exist, ain't it? The request may be taken into consideration or not. A request is not an offense or an abuse, but I think (even if you wrote "no offense" in the beginning) your answer is. There are other ways to convince me this is a bad idea, and maybe it is. For a change, after this devel answer, should I choose never to use VESA modes for the default Arch kernel, because ATM I feel like I should not support Arch by displaying their logo at boot-time? And now, because I already feel bad about even thinking about it, I'll let this idea die as it was born... quickly. I'm sorry for losing my time to share it. Please, feel free to close this request.

Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 00:29 GMT
Pierre's point wasn't to offend, and I'm not sure why it offended you so much - he's saying that this is just one cause of a million that has gained random popularity because of blog articles. This could burgeon into such requests as "how about a pink ribbon for breast cancer month" and "use <this> logo to support <some cause> from <my country>".

I see his point. We're Arch Linux, not a political movement.

That said, I should point out a couple of things:
a) Once split packages are official, Thomas does want to provide a plain old vanilla kernel in addition to ours, which would cover things like this
b) Anyone is welcome to do it. Put a PKGBUILD in the AUR, or even host the package on your own site.
Comment by Cristian C. (ckristi) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 00:49 GMT
Well, it offended me because it's not blogger's choice, but Linus' choice and it will already be present in the vanilla kernel. It also offended me more because I made a feature request and I was discouraged to even think about doing this again. I would've understand if the time to comment the patch that replaces the logo would be that big that the developer cannot afford to do this. I could've take a reason like that. I am a reasonable man. But to give examples and or counter-examples only to justify your opinion I believe it's not a reasonable way to refuse a request. There are a few things that matter in a business: people, time, quality and money. If your fellow developer would've been able to show me this will affect Arch Linux and Arch's community in any way, I would have bowed in front of him and said that he is right. No really, I understand your point, I just don't like my ideas to be trashed and rendered useless, just because anyone doesn't like it. And this is not the case either and the number of votes shows it. Ok, I understand... if I wanted, I'll do it... no problem. I just have thought it could be a nice thing to do. Linus has done a lot for us and wants to do this for a good cause. If you think supporting him is not a good idea for Arch is fine by me. I'm not going to stop using Arch because of that. But I'll think a little more before advertising this distro... just because this is not my job.
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 01:01 GMT
Wait wait... hold the phone. You made a "request", someone gave a rational reason why they're not doing it (note: a reason can be both rational AND subjective), said "no", and that is offensive? Just because someone has a different opinion than you, doesn't mean they're offending you. Please take some time to think this one through.

This is not about time. It's not about effort. It's something that we, as Arch Linux, don't really want to do. I'm on Pierre's side. This is a slippery slope if we start supporting random causes. Let's be clear here: this isn't about us changing the framebuffer icon.

And quite frankly, I don't care about Tasmanian devils. What about the Californian Condor? There are something like 50 of them left in the world.

As I said already: do it yourself. Make a PKGBUILD without the framebuffer image, build the package for both architectures, and host it somewhere. Hell, I'll even offer to host it for you on the Arch servers for a time.
Comment by Cristian C. (ckristi) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 01:16 GMT
Ok, the thing that was offending me was not the fact that Pierre had a different opinion. I even said I respect that. But, I never understood why my request was considered as an abuse. That's what offended me and, I think, the other supporters. And I'll quote Pierre here: "Arch shouldn't be abused to distribute any political, social or whatever unrelated statement." I never abused anyone into anything. It was a suggestion... and that's all.

Thanks for all your answers and time and sorry for not making myself understood. All I want is respect, even if I make a stupid request. I never had a bad intention in doing it and I don't think my original post sounded as an abuse towards Arch. If that's what Pierre thinks, then yes... I'm feeling offended. I'm not that sensitive to this cause, there are animals soon to be extinct here in my country, too... But I was not mitigating for them, but for a cause adopted by someone who should count for each and everyone of us who are happy by using something he created and maintains for us. It's not a commercial thing... i didn't suggest to put soda adverts instead of the Arch logo and I don't want to be called as an abuser if I didn't act as one. That was all.

Sorry again if I upset you, Aaron... this surely was not my intention. I really appreciate your work for this distro.

Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 01:22 GMT
Ah see, looks like a language thing - I took it to mean "abused" in the non-connotative sense. As in "to change the inherent purpose or function of something; Don't abuse the system" (via google). I assume Pierre meant as such - not saying that YOU are being abusive, but saying that doing things of this nature is not the purpose/function of Arch itself.
Comment by Cristian C. (ckristi) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 01:34 GMT
I understand. I want to make sure that you know I respect your opinions and decisions and I hope everyone agrees with me that this request should be closed.
I'll do the pushing of the button after sending this comment. Sorry to the supporters of this request, we've tried... It's late now here (3:30AM), but tomorrow night I'll try to patch the PKGBUILD for the purpose and if everything goes well, I'll make it public.
Comment by Phillip Smith (fukawi2) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 01:35 GMT
I'm happy to host a .pkg.tar.gz for the duration of this kernel if someone can build it. I never have any luck building my own kernels :|
Comment by Phillip Smith (fukawi2) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 01:36 GMT
This kernal release I mean (.29) ;)
Comment by Allan McRae (Allan) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 05:02 GMT
I do care about Tasmanian devils (the have a really weird genetic cancer that causes their face to swell up and stopping them eating, and it is passed on by biting...). However, this is very strange that this cause was chosen over the vast variety of other causes which are also important. Also, I agree that it is not our place to support any cause.
Comment by Phillip Smith (fukawi2) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 05:07 GMT
IIRC Allan, it was Linus' way of supporting the mascot of Linux.conf.au this year. It was 'auctioned' at one of the fundraising events.
Comment by Pierre Schmitz (Pierre) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 09:09 GMT
Oh dear, I am surprised of sich reactions. @christi: It wasn't my intention to render you request invalid or abusive. In that case I would have just closed it and wouldn't have tried to make my point about this.
Comment by Eduardo Romero (kensai) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 12:37 GMT
I really respect the developers on this one, but I as a developer would like to add my opinion. Linus Torvalds chose this when he was at linux.conf.au. Just to support the Australian Linux Users as well, and make them feel good. It is much more for fun.

One thing is clear, this doesn't go against the Arch Linux policies, why? because this is an upstream change, aur policy is to keep up with upstream, so patching the logo has always been a luxury and against our philosophy all this years. I am neutral for this feature request, if it happens great, if it doens't then great as well. But just wanted to point out that this feature request is in no way against Arch policies, the contrary, this is an upstream change.
Comment by Pierre Schmitz (Pierre) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 12:54 GMT
Call me insane, but I think those are two different requests, even if the result is practically the same. This request is about replacing the current Arch boot logo with the Tuz.

Kensai's concern was about replacing the Arch logo by the upstream one. Afaik we had a discussion about the latter some time ago. This will lead into a discussion about branding at all etc.. So I think for this a separate feauture request or discussion on our ml would be better.
Comment by Eduardo Romero (kensai) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 13:01 GMT
It isn't Pierre, read the articles, tuz is going to be added upstream for 2.6.29 so practically the request is about going with upstream for this release just for the sake of it, even though we don't keep following upstream when 2.6.30 comes out. My reasoining is that saying this goes against Arch policies is wrong. Even though I don't care if the feature request is never implemented.
Comment by Dan Griffiths (Ghost1227) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 13:10 GMT
Just my two cents... this discussion is going to very quickly get out of hand. Everyone has had valid points, but I think that Eduardo has the right idea. This doesn't go against Arch policies, so it's no big deal either way. If you want it done and we don't want to do it officially, build a package for it and post it to the AUR. I'm sure there are plenty of users out there who would use it. But at the same time, there are plenty of people who don't want to get involved in the politics and wouldn't use it. I wouldn't use it just because I like my system the way it is, logos and all.

Effectively what I'm saying is stop arguing about something that has no effect on how the distribution itself runs before someone says something stupid and we start to lose users over a branding issue that's only relevant for a month or so anyway.
Comment by Allan McRae (Allan) - Thursday, 19 March 2009, 13:15 GMT
Well, I'm going to do a moderator job and close this before it gets out of hand. The kernel devs have had all the emails about this. so they can make the decision on their own.

Loading...