this actually sounds like adding a "comments" box as found in aur to arch packages page and making it more formal so that a list of posted PKGBUILDs can be displayed. this could also mean "alternative" builds for the same version could be displayed... it's a good idea, but it can get messy
On 10/25/07, Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let me prefix this by saying that I know the developers have lots of > things to do (including "real-life" stuff) and I am not intending to > offend anyone by this idea - especially the maintainer of the eclipse > package which I am going to use as an example. Also this may be a > really bad idea! :) > > I have noticed over the years that every so often a package in the main > repos stagnates. That is, it does not get updated for a while after a > newer version is available. Now Arch users tend to like new shiny > things... so when this happens a number of updated PKGBUILDs appear on > the forums and (worse?) subtly renamed packages appear in AUR. This has > happened with eclipse & eclipse-cdt. Eclipse has not been updated to > version 3.3 in the months since it was released. So now in AUR there is > "eclipse-bin" and "eclipse-cdt4". While eclipse-bin is technically a > "different package" (just binary version from website), eclipse-cdt4 is > just the natural upgrade from eclipse-cdt in extra. My strong suspicion > is that neither of these packages would have appeared in AUR if they > were updated in extra and they will sit there without a maintainer (and > never be used) once the update of the package in extra occurs. > > A possible solution would be to have a website where users could submit > a PKGBUILD for a package needing updated in the main repos. Then this > PKGBUILD could be taken by a developer, reviewed and added to the main > repositories. This may be useful for packages with no maintainer > (although I realize you are trying to clear those from the repos) and > relieve some of the pressure on developers in maintaining the > non-essential packages. This page with the submitted PKGBUILDs would > need to be viewable publicly so people could see what has been submitted > and update things themselves - so it would sort of be an AUR for the > packages in the main repo. > > Again, I realize that Arch has a relatively small development team and > know about limited time, but using the community this way could help > maintain the rolling release ideal of having the latest stable package > available. To put some (possibly meaningless) numbers on this idea, > currently there are 171 packages flagged as out of date (~6.5%). > > Regards, > Allan > > > > > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > [email protected] > http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch >
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
