It creates syncing issues when things are upgraded. And Archlinux unfortunately has never dealt with the plagiarism issues when someone leaves let alone these syncing issues as a result.
Bob Finch On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 1:53 AM, Xavier <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 6:02 AM, w9ya <[email protected]> wrote: > > Aaron... you said you wanted people to host their own binary repos for > > little used packages in the very first emails about this subject several > > weeks ago. You have nothing since then to refute this. > > > > I am merely agreeing and was preparing to do exactly that. Daenyth helped > me > > to do this after a TU irc channel discussion about your wishes in this > area. > > People remembered them and everyone agreed that it was my decision to > remove > > something as EVERY TU currently has that right and we have never voted > > otherwise. > > > > Also logically having PKGBUILDs in two places or even binaries in two > places > > makes no sense for either Arch or myself because of support any "syncing" > > issues with pacman and in consideration of other long standing issues > with > > plagarism. > > > > If the PKGBUILDs are on AUR and the binaries in your repos, then > everything is is one place. > What is wrong with that? > > That way, all users are still free to install packages in the traditional > ways : > If the package is in an official repo (core, extra, community), then > he can install a binary directly > If the package is not in any official repo, then it should be in > AUR/unsupported and the user can retrieve the PKGBUILD from AUR and > build it. > > On top of that, packages in AUR/unsupported could also exist in > unofficial binary repos, for convenience to the users who trust these > repos. >
