2007/10/17, Paul Mattal <paul@mattal.com>:
Damir Perisa wrote:
Wednesday 17 October 2007, Aaron Griffin wrote: | This is definitely an interesting proposal. See, what we have here | is two clear camps that define [extra] different ways - packages | developers maintain, or packages the distro needs.
they are not really that cleanly separated camps.
In fact, the thing to note is that they aren't really camps or people taking sides.. it's just about the reality of free agents working in a free system scratching their own itches. We want to capitalize on all the itch-scratching going on so it can benefit us all! If a developer needs to maintain a package, and he can't do so in any repo we provide, he'll have to go do it in private.. and the community suffers from not being able to benefit as effectively from his creative energy.
Again - what's wrong with committing such packages in community? Who's prohibitting that dev from doing so except himself?
Instead, we should give him a repo where he can maintain any package he wants for as long as he wants, and require him to clean up after himself and hand the package off or demote it to unsupported when he's had enough of it.
What it gives to users? We'll end up in many repos as it was with TUR before AUR was created.
Right now, for instance, I maintain about 30 packages in a private repo for this very reason.. I was not ready to commit Arch long-term, short-term, or otherwise to have to deal with these packages.
Again - just put them in community repo (or unsupported if you like so). -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)