On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 02:18:41PM -0200, Rodrigo Coacci wrote: > On 10/25/07, David Rosenstrauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (...) > > In any case, this is really probably a communication issue more than > > anything else. People might not be so inclined to go and build > > workaround packages if they knew *why* the package was being held and > > therefore *when* they might expect an update. > > > > DR > > > > _______________________________________________ > > arch mailing list > > arch@archlinux.org > > http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch > > > > I completely agree with you here. Maybe It could be nice to have devs > comment on his package, thus allowing users know that he know the package is > out-of-date (and that he didn't ignore it) but that there are other matters > at hand (lack of time, problems with newer version, dependence on other > packages, etc) > OTOH, if we (community) are to provide PKGBUILDS to things, maybe it's > better that orphaned extra/community packages drop (automatically?) to AUR, > thus someone else interested can adopt the package and update it. Maybe get > a scale: extra->community (a TU can adopt the package) and ultimately > community->AUR. The goal is to try to keep orphaned packages in > extra/community to a minimum and solve the problem of multiple slightly > different packages on AUR
Not trying to push some sort of developer agenda here, but we've always tried to use the bug tracker for things like this. If the update is complicated, it's great to attach a PKGBUILD to a bug report and it also makes it very easy for people to see the state of a package update (and why its being held back). The eclipse package is a prime example. If there was a ticket, everyone could be refered to it and know the status of the eclipse package *and* be able to help with it. Jason
pgpxP2oraasTn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
