On 14/03/14 03:16 AM, David Phillips wrote: > Please excuse me if this isn't the right list for this (I feel > confident it is), but is there any reason why is it that something > that's as reasonably update- and maintenance-free as > http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sl not in community yet? It's got > over three hundred votes; is there a reason for it staying out of > community? I can understand the viewpoint of it being such a small > package that it's not worth the time and space on mirrors, but still? > > Wow, I'm proof reading this message just now and it sounds more > demanding than intended. > > Cheers all
Packages are not included in the repositories based on popularity. A package is included if and only if a developer or trusted user is interested in maintaining the packages in the repositories. It's best when packages are maintained by people who use them, because they'll know when there's obvious breakage and have an interest in keeping it well-maintained. If no one wants to take on the responsibility of checking that a barely funny joke program keeps working, I don't think that's a problem. :P
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
