2009/4/5 Angel Velásquez <an...@archlinux.com.ve>: > This should be 4.- and it's more like than my 2nd point .. then that > point about Maintainer is just because exist a binary package in > official repos and it's maintained by will be lost, so the concept > will change to Maintainer is the people who actually owns the PKGBUILD > in any repo or AUR.. (just to clarify how to use the tags). I don't really have any comment to add here, but I'm not quite sure if I understand... you're saying that the intention of the maintainer tag is to store the data because the binary repos don't?
> Don't know, sometimes I just generate flames, maybe is my bad english :D. Ah, ok. I was confused :P > So resuming: there is a new point on the list! by Daenyth, who will > decide will be the valid point is the question that I have right now. As I said before, it seems like the general consensus was in favor of changing it. http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2008-October/002502.html