On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:01:48 -0200 Ángel Velásquez <[email protected]> wrote: > 2010/11/17 Kaiting Chen <[email protected]>: > > How can we make the AUR even better? I'll start: > > > > 1. Integrated distributed version control system > +1 but I think distributed is not necessary at all, but keeping the > revisions of a PKGBUILD or the rest of the files will be nice.
I agree with Ángel a distributed VCS is not the correct choice here, I love git but for this a central one is the more useful. As I'm not fully into this either I thought a while about this and came to the conclusion, that a VCS might be to bloated in general. As I like the basic idea that it might be useful to keep the last x tarballs on the server just with growing "revisions" and if the count is full when a new one is submitted just the oldest one is removed. The naming scheme could be something like this pkgname.rev.tar.gz I don't think changing the upload part for that would be much work so if the idea is welcome I'll implement it (at least try to, don't work much with web stuff). > > 2. User provided binaries (if case anyone wants to volunteer) (this > > should probably be carefully controlled) > > -1 ... if anyone wants to volunteer, they can apply to be a TU. -1 I agree with Ángel, it's not that hard to become a TU, show that you're a nice guy, not slacking and trustworthy and you'll most probably become one. > > > 3. Time-adjusted 'relevance' measure (votes are useful but suck at > > the same time; nobody cares if a packages was upvoted 9000+ times a > > million years ago, especially if it's already been obsoleted by > > something else) > > 0 No comments, maybe we should do one better statistic, number of > downloads per day or something like. -1 I think there is a lot of stuff out there which is useful but rarely gets new releases as the code fits it's specifications even after several years so for AUR I don't really see a point in that. Same for the comments for older packages that are used only by few users there are often old but still helpful comments. > > 4. An official client > > -1 No, but if point 1 is accomplished you will do your own client for > handle it :) -1 We have pacman, for AUR there are scripts you may use when you are aware of the fact that this is not an official package of the distri- bution which you are installing right now, else some people might see a ports or emerge like util in this and we have the accusations if the stuff produces problems. > > 5. LDAP support because LDAP makes everything so much better > > 0 LDAP support just for AUR? I thought in LDAP to manage all our > systems (forums, bbs, wiki, dev/tu backends) -but this requires soo > manpower-, so I'd like to implement this, but not just for AUR .. and > it will be good if these ideas goes to AUR2, because having LDAP + a > VCS system will make a little bit painful the migration process, from > the actual aur to the new aur. 0 I'm not familiar with LDAP except some minor information so I can't say to this proposal. Thanks for thinking about AUR, tough I don't like most of your proposals. ;-) -- Jabber: [email protected] Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
