On 10/25/07, David Rosenstrauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(...)
In any case, this is really probably a communication issue more than
> anything else. People might not be so inclined to go and build
> workaround packages if they knew *why* the package was being held and
> therefore *when* they might expect an update.
>
> DR
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch mailing list
> arch@archlinux.org
> http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
>
I completely agree with you here. Maybe It could be nice to have devs
comment on his package, thus allowing users know that he know the package is
out-of-date (and that he didn't ignore it) but that there are other matters
at hand (lack of time, problems with newer version, dependence on other
packages, etc)
OTOH, if we (community) are to provide PKGBUILDS to things, maybe it's
better that orphaned extra/community packages drop (automatically?) to AUR,
thus someone else interested can adopt the package and update it. Maybe get
a scale: extra->community (a TU can adopt the package) and ultimately
community->AUR. The goal is to try to keep orphaned packages in
extra/community to a minimum and solve the problem of multiple slightly
different packages on AUR
--
Cheers,
Rodrigo
A computer is like air conditioning: it becomes useless when you open
windows.
~Linus Torvalds
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
arch@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
