On Tue 07 Dec 2010 03:58 +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > On 6 December 2010 22:47, Dave Reisner <d...@falconindy.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 03:20:06PM +0100, Heiko Baums wrote: > >> In most cases there's a reason for having binaries, icons and the like > >> in a package. And whether such a package actually has a bad quality or > >> its contents are necessary can't be decided by a bot. > > > > In _all_ cases, binaries are not permissable as stated by the AUR > > guidelines [1]. Your opinion doesn't change this. A proposal to amend the > > guidelines can. > > There is no need to ammend the guidelines. We have been including > desktop files, images (needed by the desktop files most of the time) > and init scripts all along, because it should be a common > understanding. > > find /var/abs -name *.png | wc -l == 60
I might be kind of crazy here, but maybe desktop files and icons are things that should be distributed from upstream. So maintainers should work to get those included like a patch or whatnot.