On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 2:39 AM, Kwang Moo Yi via arch-general < arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 01/09/16 20:32, Chi Hsuan Yen via arch-general wrote:
Yep that's my expectation. There were several times, that a new version with important fixes (fix for YouTube downloading, etc.) was released, and lots of people came to our issue tracker for "broken" YouTube downloading because the Arch version was not updated yet.
In this case, wouldn't it suite better to be in the AUR always?
From "Rules of submission" section on Arch Wiki: [1]
Check the official package database https://www.archlinux.org/packages/ for the package. If *any version* of it exists, *do not* submit the package. If the official package is out-of-date, flag it as such. I'm not sure whether my case is an exception to this rule or not.
It would be practically impossible that a package to be reviewed and signed so often. Also, my personal expectation on the official packages is to be more stable than that.
Unlike other programs, most new youtube-dl bugs come from changed websites, not changes in youtube-dl itself. For example if YouTube changes how videos are delivered, we have to update relevant codes and ask users to update as soon as possible.
Cheers, Kwang
[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository