On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 12:15:07 +0200 Jaco Kroon <j...@uls.co.za> wrote: > You mentioned working raport with upstream? Can we rely on that to at > the very least get them to update that to "due to the way Gentoo > functions we request that you first file issues with the Gentoo > repository rather than directly with rxvt-unicode? That is pure and > outright slander, and whilst I "get" (to an extent) and GNU/Linux > statement - he should then have the same issue with RedHat Enterprise > GNU/Linux. Or with "Debian" and "CentOS" for that matter which does not > contain "GNU/Linux" in the name. Alternatively if there is no issue > with that then perhaps we should consider just being "Gentoo" ...
Historical context probably matters here. That's a very old statement. Partly from the era when Gentoo was "cool" and when "ricing" was a thing. At the time, upstream was inundated with absurd requests like "oh noes, I disabled CXX Exceptions, and the code broke, upstream is wrong!". Whatever we did, or upstream did, the absurd complaints have gone away. But I'll see what I can wrangle :)
pgpfy7l8eNo37.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
