On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 02:48:37AM +0800, Chi Hsuan Yen via arch-general wrote:
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 If the official package is out-of-date, flag it as such.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.
Are the actual releases of youtube-dl particularly more stable than the -git versions? I myself only use the -git package from the AUR, and have never had an issue with it. If this is the case, then I think the current situation is probably fine (-git in AUR, "stable" in official repos). --Sean