Hey, It may not be funny, but it's a classic :-) But no, no that's fair enough.
On 14/03/2014, Daniel Micay <danielmi...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 > > -- David Phillips GPG Key 0x7BF3D17D0884BF5B Fingerprint 2426 235A 7831 AA2F 56AF 4BC0 7BF3 D17D 0884 BF5B