On 11/3/21 13:07, Samir Nassar via arch-general wrote:
On Wednesday 3 November 2021 11:47:32 CET Vasi Vilvoiu via arch-general wrote:
That's unfair to your userbase. There's no way for people to contribute to core packages, period. Community packages require being a TU, which as far as I know is not an easy process to go through. The AUR does not accept "under any circumstances"[1] packages already in community/core.
I don't see how not having access to to the Arch Linux infrastructure stops you or anyone from collaborating on fixes using ones own resources. Whether you use a platform such as GitHub, GitLab straight up hosting the assets yourself all work.
People are already doing that for specific corner cases. There's also an exception in the AUR rules that allow packages compiled with patches or extra features. But that is in no way, shape or form a valid way of treating out of date packages. What is, then, the purpose of ArchLinux if I need to compile a good chunk of the packages (especially GNU toolchain)? Make no mistake, the selling point of Arch is that it provides binary package repos and the setup/sync time is very small. Take that away and we start having pacman/PKGBUILD vs Portage/ebuild discussions where the "winner" is not so clear cut as you think. What you should take away from this is not a threat (please, please, please!) but the fact that IMHO the developers need to make it clear what their stance is on this topic. Best regards, Vasi Vilvoiu