On 10 May 2012 18:48, Eric Bélanger <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:44 AM, Thomas Bächler <[email protected]> wrote: >> Am 10.05.2012 03:28, schrieb Allan McRae: >>> Do we care about makedepends being in repos lower down the hierarchy? >>> >>> The current Integrity Check email lists >170 issues in this category. >>> If these are never going to be addressed, I suggest we remove it from >>> the output so that the more important errors are focused on. >> >> It is impossible to respect these unless you want to considerably blow >> up [core]. >> >> > > We can always make an exception for the [core] packages, especially if > the makedepends have other (make)depends in extra/community. If we do > something about it, we need to decide if the [core] repo can have > makedepends in [community] or just in [extra]. > > If we move packages from community to core/extra, we need to be sure > that it will have a maintainer (like the maintainer of the packages > which makedepends on it, for example). It wouldn't make sense to move > packages currently maintained by a TU in community to another repo > where it will remain orphaned.
We should have some sort of policy. Like this one for e.g.: If there is no other (make)depend in that repo you might want to promote it for the package that needs it in a higher repo, provided that there will be a maintainer in the new repo. Personally, I'd like it if each repo were made to be 'self-sufficient' (that is, include pkgs required at build time). -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
