On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Andreas Radke <[email protected]> wrote: > Am Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:47:22 +0100 > schrieb Thomas Bächler <[email protected]>: > >> Daniel Isenmann schrieb: >> > Hi, >> > >> > there were a discussion on the arch-general list about why not >> > adding moonlight to the repo >> > (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-January/003326.html). >> > >> > Now I want to discuss this topic further from a developer point of >> > view. >> >> First thought: I don't care. I have never come across anything that >> needs Silverlight/Moonlight. >> >> Second thought: If I ever come across a site that needs it, I'd be >> happy if it would be available with pacman -S moonlight. >> >> Third thought: I still don't care, and I won't until I come across >> the situation in my second thought. >> >> So if you want to maintain it, do it. If not, then don't. >> > > In some way I don't care too. If you want to maintain then do it. > > But I see no need to do this in our official extra repository. I > haven't come across one single website using it. So I see no reason for > an exception from our rules here. We should do what we do with all other > packages: put it into AUR and wait how important it will become. The > number of votes will be one point. An increasing number of websites > using it may be the other one. > > -Andy >
I agree with Andy. We should keep it in AUR for a while to see if it's popular enough to be in the extra repo. |Anyway, I'm sharing everyone sentiment of not caring.
