On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 at 02:36:03, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > I don't fully understand the logic in currently having an .AURINFO > instead of defining the .SRCINFO format right now and have a tool > generating those for the time being (since it'll likely be the same > format as .PKGINFO). It can go in makepkg later.
Because the requirements for such a .SRCINFO are much higher than the requirements for what we need in the AUR. For example, it needs to support split packages. Feel free to come up with a format that is general enough to be accepted as official .SRCINFO and send patches to pacman-dev, though. > J. Leclanche > > > On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Lukas Fleischer > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 at 23:49:39, Justin Dray wrote: > >> [...] > >> It might also be a good idea to write out what fields are available and > >> their purpose on the wiki similar to the PKGBUILD page ( > >> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PKGBUILD) and perhaps link to it from > >> the AUR user guidelines page? It will be forgotten by most packagers if the > >> only information about it is a commit message and a mailing list thread. > > > > That is what I suggested in the initial mail. > > > >> > >> Regards, > >> Justin Dray > >> E: [email protected] > >> M: 0433348284
