Re: [dev] [sxiv] Discussion

From: Anselm R Garbe <>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:27:23 +0200

Hi there,

On 9 August 2016 at 10:17, FRIGN <> wrote:
> don't take it personally, Bert, but I don't think your project sxiv[0]
> belongs to the suckless git-repository.
> Not only is it licensed with the GPLv2, which is despicable in itself,
> but the code doesn't even look suckless to me and there are good ways
> to go around the whole image-format-cancer-spread nowadays.
> Look at how sent does image handling; it's definitely best to push this
> task toward other tools, like farbfeld, for easy internal handling.
> C: 3663 (98.05%)
> sh: 43 (1.15%)
> awk: 30 (0.80%)
> Do we really need a project the size of dwm to display images?
> The name suckless stands for quality software, which foremost tries to
> accomplish elegance and simplicity. There are already too many git
> repositories in, and added to this it seems the sxiv
> repo on is just a github mirror, with all its implied
> beauty[1]. Do I really need to dig around github now to see what the
> commit fixed?
> What do you think?

Disclaimer: what I'm saying next is not related at all to sxiv -- to
me a very valid image and thumbnail viewing tool.

I think we should address our overall project portfolio and
responsibility situation at slcon3 end of Sep. I think the project has diverged in many directions and needs some
clear rules and leadership wrt. which project to host, which developer
felling decisions for a particular project and which project to
decline or remove.

Due to the fact that many contributors have done great work so far and
also that we have formed a legal entity for we need a
board to agree and define such rules for the future and to also agree
on a project decision and governance board in the future.

In the past I felt confident to fell some decisions on my own. Now I
feel a bit uncomfortable doing this on my own sake. I do see the same
problem if someone else related with makes such
proposals. If the overall entity representatives agree on the single
leadership model, that would be fine by me. But we have to discuss
this first at slcon3.

So let's stop such proposals for now, until we have made an agreement
with the other representatives.

Received on Tue Aug 16 2016 - 08:27:23 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Aug 16 2016 - 08:36:13 CEST