wt., 11.12.2018, 20:45: Alad Wenter via aur-general < aur-general@archlinux.org> napisał(a):
> On 12/11/18 8:30 PM, Alad Wenter wrote: > > > Since the discussion period is about to end without much discussion... > > > > Right now the rate of new applications is very high - about 2 new > > applications per month. That makes a thorough review difficult. > > > > Considering the positive experiences of the sponsor, it would be a shame > > to let a voting period pass. That said, I'm not sure we have sufficient > > information - at present - to proceed with such a voting period in a > > meaningful manner. > > > > So about Foxboron's question for confirmation: "Say one or two people > > confirm they think the voting process should be continued after the > > discussion has ended?" - I don't know. > > > > Alad > > Let's try to get the ball rolling by asking some questions. > > 1. When I look at LUA modules, I see that most are available on > "luarocks", which is apparently a package manager for LUA. Can you > leverage this to make more LUA modules available on Arch? > > 2. You have some AUR packages for LUA modules of your own making, yet > they hardcode gcc lines instead of using a Makefile. [1] (At least they > respect $CFLAGS and $LDFLAGS, I guess.) Why? > > 3. I have no idea on what some of your more complicated packages do, or > why they would require said complexity, e.g. iup. [2] Perhaps you could > explain a bit on that regard. > > 4. Related to the above, there are no current packaging guidelines for > LUA packages. [3] Do you plan on starting an effort (possibly with other > LUA package maintainers) to remedy this? > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=lua-compat53 > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=iup > [3] > > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_package_guidelines#Additional_guidelines > > Alad > >