On Sun, 03 Aug 2014 at 19:12:38, Doug Newgard wrote: > On 2014-08-03 10:15, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > > On Sun, 03 Aug 2014 at 15:33:28, Doug Newgard wrote: > >> On 2014-08-03 08:26, [email protected] wrote: > >> > mawcomw [1] filed a deletion request for python-argparse [2]: > >> > > >> > It was a split package, and now i will use two pkgbuilds, one for > >> > python2 and another for python3. > >> > > >> > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/mawcomw/ > >> > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/python-argparse/ > >> > >> So upload the py3 version to the current python-argparse package, then > >> upload a new python2-argparse. No need to remove what's there. > >> > > > > Agreed. I would also be interested in why you would like to replace a > > split package with two separate packages? > > This actually makes sense to me. Most people will only want one version > or the other of the lib, depending on what software is using it. Having > it as a split package forces them to build both and have all the deps > for both installed. Makes sense in a binary repo, not so much in the > AUR. >
I just built the python-argparse split package in less than three seconds. Build time isn't a valid argument here. Also, I highly recommend building all AUR packages inside a chroot; otherwise, you have no control of what happens on your file system (think of broken build scripts that ignore $(DESTDIR) etc.) I think it is a good idea to use split packages unless there are good reasons not to do so. Note that the AUR can also be viewed as a staging area for source packages that might eventually be moved to the official repositories. Not using split packages means more work for Trusted Users and developers when moving.
