The list is good idea, maybe someone (eg me ;-)) finds out that there is some interesting package and he will adopt it.
2008/5/3 Allan McRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Alessio Bolognino wrote: > > > On Fri 2008-05-02 12:08 , Eric Belanger wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, 3 May 2008, Allan McRae wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Luká Jirkovský wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very, very > old. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then they probably fall in this category of the suggest removal > guidelines > > > > - outdated and orphaned packages with few or no votes > > > > > > > > > > > > This situation is behind my reasoning to create a list of potential > removals first. I think we need to be careful of removing too many > packages, especially in our first cleanup attempt. Just the really unneeded > ones as a first step. I had even considered that once the list was made, > then I would archive all the relevant PKGBUILDs before deleting them. But it > would be better to just not delete useful packages in the first place... > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think it's a good idea to remove orphaned packages simply > because they are out-of-date. Even out-of-date they can still be useful as > it's better than having no PKGBUILD at all and maybe someone will adopt them > eventually. That's the reason why we call it unsupported: the PKGBUILD can > be out-of-date, unmaintained or not very good quality-wise. A lot of work > has been invested in these PKGBUILD. > > > > > > > > > > I totally agree with Eric here. I'm a bit worried about this "cleanup > frenzy": there is a package in the > > AUR that is out-of-date and doesn't even compile. Why should we > > remove it? As Eric said, it's better than nothing. > > > > Unless the package is obsolete (e.g. gaim/pidgin) or it is a package > > already in the repos, IMHO there is no need to remove it. > > > > If a PKGBUILD contains errors, fix it, if you want to, but do not remove > > it. What about a "bug-fix day" instead of a "cleanup day" ? > > > > > > > Let me be clear here that I will in now way encourage the deletion of > anything that may be useful in the future. I now how annoying it can be to > have packages you have spent time on deleted from the AUR even if you have > orphaned them (who deleted dpkg & rpm... I am actually quite pissed off > about that). This is my reasoning behind creating a list first. That way > there is time for people to object to the removals before it happens. > > As an example, look at the alienarena packages. I'm reasonably sure > alienarena2007 is replaced by alienarena. And I only looked at a couple of > pages... > > Allan > > > > >
