Re: [aur-general] Stepping down as a TU
On 01/31/2017 04:21 PM, Antonio Rojas wrote: > >>> >>> Well, either someone else decides to adopt them, or they have to be >>> moved to AUR. Are there any other options? >>> >> >> I don't think so. I was just curious whether you had something >> planned. Is there anyone else interest in maintainership of the D >> packages? >> > > It would be great if we could bring in someone to take care of D > packages. I need at least one compiler for appstream-generator, > but I wouldn't touch a D compiler package myself with a 10 foot > pole. I have created call for arms announcement in D forums (http://forum.dlang.org/post/o6sldo$1pad$1...@digitalmars.com), will see if there is anyone interested. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] Stepping down as a TU
On 01/31/2017 12:37 PM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > Farewell! Thanks for your maintainership. What will happen to the D stuff now? Thanks! Well, either someone else decides to adopt them, or they have to be moved to AUR. Are there any other options? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[aur-general] Stepping down as a TU
Hello, For a while I have been maintaining packages related to D programming language, motivated by being involved with the upstream. As the latter has come to its end I feel it be would appropriate to revoke my TU access too - I don't think I will have much time for any other package maintenance outside of D realm. Best luck and keep rocking! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU application, sponsored by Lukas Fleischer
I think it is a wrong assumption to say that having "bad" packages at time of application as no different that having those as an established user. Amount of attention spent to such stuff inevitably goes down as amount of load increases (and it stops being interesting/satisfying) so if there are some issues right now I'd generally assume situation will become even worse after approval, not better. Point of application is identical to point of theoretical perfection in my opinion.
