On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 04:16:57PM +0200, wakeup wrote: > I do realize that it is possible to write those CLI-tools with a lot of > shell-hacking and excessive use of various string manipulation tools. > You have to see though, that this is a pain for devs! I do not think > AUR's web interface represents the Arch way (keeping it simple) good > enough, because it makes writing a light client much more difficult than > it has to be. > Of course one can access the AUR via CLI, but it sure is not the simple > way. > > Think of the other benefits a client/server model brings with it, like > bigger scalability through mirroring (and in general) or the > possibility to choose your favorite client. >
There isn't any good full featured non web access to AUR. I'd love to see something like that, and eventually I mean to start writing a system from scratch that could replace AUR. There was a project called repoman a while back that was attempting to do something similar I think. Take a look at tupkg and tupkgs in the AUR code. I was thinking that might be useful for writing a new system. Also, this discussion might be more appropriate in aur-dev.
