On 3 February 2011 11:14, Xyne <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > A post on the forum[1] brought my attention to the Official Repositories wiki > page[2]. > > A recent note by Louipc states: "Technically, both the [community] and > [unsupported] repos make up the AUR.". > > Is this really still true? The AUR website is completely independent of > [community] now and I believe that all technical ties between [community] and > [unsupported] have been severed. > > AUR pages on the wiki clearly refer to [unsupported] in many contexts, e.g. > the > main AUR article[3] contains the following snippets: > > "The Arch User Repository (AUR) is a community-driven repository for Arch > users. It contains package descriptions (PKGBUILDs) that allow you to compile > a > package from source with makepkg and then install it via pacman." > > "[community], unlike AUR, contains binary packages" > > I also believe that most users immediately think of [unsupported] and only > [unsupported] when speaking of the AUR. > > Furthermore, both are repositories in their own right, so it is a misnomer to > refer to them as a singular "Arch User Repository". > > > What is the point of claiming that [community] is part of AUR? It seems like > an > unnecessarily confusing vestige of [community]'s origins.
Clearly, the move to devtools has decoupled the binary repository from the AUR web, but I don't think it has decoupled the repository from its purpose.
