alt Hacker NewsYou're suggesting that because the system doesn't offer a standalone recipe to setup Hyprland, implying that everything else it does include and does better than anything else is not a standalone package also, it's silly and amateurish and they don't know what they are doing. You can try and convince me all you want, but that is not a point of view I could ever get behind, sorry.
I did not say "despite having a fix to hyprland, they don't offer a standalone recipe", I'm referring to the whole behavior: how it is presented, how it is hyped, how there is its own conference, its own merchandising, ... When it comes to hyprland, there is this childish attitude of "people do what they want, extract it from the source yourself" when people are legitimately surprised on how the thing was handled.
If it was presented as "Hey, we know it's just some scripts, we don't do the same kind of work that traditional distributions do. We still call it a distribution, but don't hesitate to support Arch instead who is doing the hard work for us", it would be different. But it is apparently not what is done (based on what I've read on the subject in the meanwhile).
What I'm saying is obviously not as simplistic as how you summarized it. It looks like you are just upset that someone may see bad signs in the way this distribution (or whatever one wants to call it) is handled. That's fine, I'm not forcing you to not use it, the same way I'm not forcing anyone to not use anything that is overhyped.