On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 07:25:04PM -0800, Amitav Mohanty via aur-general wrote: > Hi
Hello > I have a proposition for AUR package builds. Currently, if a package goes > out of date, it can be flagged so but we need the maintainer to update it. Makes sense so far. > So, if a non-maintainer wants to send the update the package build, (s)he > will need to create a new package. [...] What? Why not just post a link to a patch/diff on the package? > [...] My proposition is to have a git based > system where a package's related files can be maintained. The AUR /is/ currently git-based? > [...] So, the following > benefits can be targeted: > - to update a package build, one does not need to copy the old one and > create a new package; sending a PR will suffice Again, what is wrong with posting a link to a patch or diff in the package's comments > - the maintainer model can be improved. A core set of maintainers or an > active and trusted set of maintainers can review such PRs if the maintainer > is not available. Packages can have more than one maintainer on the AUR. If a package is ditched for so long that intervention is needed for a package to be taken off the maintainer and given to someone else who is willing to maintain it, then this is what the Trusted Users are for. > - even if no reviewer is available, the modified package build can be > released as non-approved one and users will still be able to use the > package build. This comes inherently with the user-submitted diff/patch in the comments, as is currently the "approved" behaviour. > > I would like to know thoughts about this proposition. > > Regards, > Amitav Thanks, David
