[sgerrand]

Maintainer of the Alpine glibc package referenced here. For some background context, this package was originally created to solve a specific problem long before Alpine provided glibc compatibility packages like `libc6-compat` and others. I agree that this package shouldn't be considered "blessed" or an official Alpine package or a default solution for running programs originally compiled against the GNU C library on Alpine Linux, far from it. The source control repository uses `alpine-pkg-` as a prefix to denote what it's used for—not as a means of assumed official status or such like.

What I find saddening is to see passive aggressive statements like

> I have additionally suggested that the TSC may wish to have the Alpine Council reach out to the alpine-glibc project to find a solution which appropriately communicates that the project is not supported in any way by Alpine.

To the Alpine Linux TSC: please get in contact with me about any and all disclaimers you want to add to this package! I'd love to have these discussions faster and in the open, rather than discovering this disquiet tangentially. Let's get these issues resolved as soon as possible in a way that everyone concerned finds acceptable.

[eqvinox]

You have a communication issue in that people assume you're providing something Alpine "official".

They have a communication issue in this escalation (TSC/Council) before trying to simply talk to you.

I'm not gonna blame either of you.

[ariadneconill]

We did not communicate with Sasha because bluntly, we have no objection to the existence of this package itself, but rather third parties distributing the combination to others without disclosing the many caveats about it.

Sasha's package is not the problem, it is the third-party distributors who distribute the final result as an "alpine" image, which leads people to believe that everything is legit about it.

[t0mas88]

The whole blog post reads a bit hot headed, even more so if this is step one instead of first reaching out to a fellow open source community member.

[fao_]

A comment you're next to written by the post author 20 minutes before you wrote this one, suggests that is not the case.

[elzbardico]

What a load of bs! If they have any issue with your project why not just open an issue?

[pxc]

j/w: What use cases do you have or have in mind for your glibc package? Do you see it as a temporary step for adding pre-built things to Alpine images during development, before you have time to rebuild them against musl? Do you feel some prod use cases are ‘safe enough’?

Or nowadays do you generally prefer the upstream compatibility packages you mentioned?

[sgerrand]

I don't compile my own software against glibc and run it in Alpine. As mentioned previously, this package was created ~ 6 years ago to run software compiled against glibc (that didn't have the source code available) in Alpine Linux. I don't recommend that anyone uses it over the equivalent Alpine package or compiling your software against musl-c.

[pxc]

Gotcha. Sorry your obsolete workaround is being painted as new and borderline malicious. :-\

[peter_l_downs]

And it's been very useful for exactly that purpose -- thank you for providing it (happy user here!)