On 08/11/10 18:44, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 16:04 +0200, Peter Simons wrote:
Well, when a Haskell package is obviously out-of-date on AUR and someone
offers to take over maintenance, then disown it and let that person
handle the package. That's the way it's done for everything else, and
the procedure seems to work fine. It's a mystery to me why the ArchLinux
team deviated from that procedure for Haskell packages in the first
place.
Take care,
Peter
Wasn't there a Haskell update script that automatically did the
updating?
I thought so... I think the reason we (Haskellers) got this special case
for the Haskell-Hackage packages is we thought we had a cool tool that
would do it all automatically, and everyone (Arch and/or Haskell I
guess) was excited about it. But evidently something in the technology
or the process stopped/didn't work quite that well (yet) (And
until/unless it does, using the usual AUR rules on ownership makes sense
to me.) -- I'm not sure what sort of obstacles remain currently:
probably Don knows but is busy with other work...
-Isaac
