On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:57:42AM +0100, Philipp Überbacher wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:35:59PM -0800, Thayer Williams wrote: > > > Personally, I feel it's important to give credit where credit is due. > > > IMO it doesn't matter whether someone orphans a PKGBUILD, they still > > > deserve credit for their initial efforts in creating/maintaining it. > > > I also believe it's valid for non-TUs to be considered "maintainers" > > > within the AUR. They are in effect maintaining the package, even if > > > it's only a build script. Should the package later be adopted by a > > > dev/TU then the initial maintainer should be credited for their > > > contribution. That's just good business in my opinion.
+1 > > > Maintainer == current custodian of the PKGBUILD and/or binaries > > > Contributor == one who has previously contributed to the maintenance > > > of said PKGBUILD and/or binary This is also what is meanwhile reflected by: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards#Submitting_Packages_to_the_AUR -- Florian Friesdorf <[email protected]> GPG FPR: EA5C F2B4 FBBB BA65 3DCD E8ED 82A1 6522 4A1F 4367 Jabber/XMPP: [email protected] OTR FPR: 9E191746 213321FE C896B37D 24B118C0 31785700 IRC: chaoflow on freenode,ircnet,blafasel,OFTC
pgpJHk7nXPOsE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
