Xyne wrote: > I did not know about previous discussions concerning package sizes nor > do I see how you could reasonably expect me to know about them if I > were not here for them. I have not read the entire archive of > aur-general.
Package size might have been discussed in the arguments last November, but most of that thread was really concerned with the presence of unpopular packages. > What defines "necessary" when dealing with community packages? I > thought core and extra were for "necessary" packages while community > was for packages that the community wanted. Where does necessity enter I think [community] is about popularity, moreso than necessity. Nexuiz has 222 votes. It more than satisfies the criteria for being in [community]. IMHO, it belongs in a binary repo, rather than [unsupported]. This argument is about a technical problem, rather than a social or cultural one. The debate will go away when the technical problem is solved. Packages in [community] have categories, and one of those categories is "games". One solution is a "partial mirror" script, which excludes packages from a mirror based on their category. This also obviates any perceived need to split [community]. Someone has to write the script, but it seems like a good idea to me! -- Chris
