Am 28.02.2019 um 04:25 schrieb Drew DeVault via aur-general:
On 2019-02-28 2:22 AM, Levente Polyak via aur-general wrote:
For the AUR I don't keep up with upstream releases, I just wait for
someone to mark the package as outdated. For Alpine Linux I use a
combination of subscribing to the upstream -announce mailing list and
subscribing to GitHub releases as appropriate; would do something
similar for Arch Linux community.
Well, to be honest its the maintainers responsibility to keep track of
upstream and not outsource out of date flagging to someone else. There
is no difference between [community] and AUR for something that is a
maintainer responsibility.
I respectfully disagree. The barrier to entry for the AUR is almost
nonexistent and there's no expectation of support or quality - from Arch
Linux or from the maintainers. I take some degree of personal pride in
having nice AUR packages, but I also have a limited amount of time. Of
course, I take my responsibility as maintainer much more seriously when
working with packages in official repos.
Considering there's a wiki page on what packages should be submitted and
which not, there's definitely *some* expectation of quality... The way
you put it, there'd be no point in TUs taking AUR requests or addressing
emails, and we'd all be out of a job.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository#Rules_of_submission
Generally, while expectations are naturally not as high as with
community packages, lacking quality of PKGBUILDs in AUR remains
problematic when trying to promote AUR packages to community. Due to
this, a complete rewrite of the PKGBUILD is usually required, rather
than making some minor adjustments.
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2016-October/032845.html
