[2013-05-01 10:54:40 -0400] Pavan Yalamanchili:

Subject: [arch-general] What is the policy regarding the urgency of fixes ?

Do you expect replies in the Subject field too? We all agree on ground rules which are clearly stated in the wiki (for instance: avoid patches that are non-critical or have not been approved upstream). However the precise interpretation of these guidelines is left to individual packagers. You should simply contact that in charge of the package you brought up. -- Gaetan

On 1 May 2013 22:54, Pavan Yalamanchili <contact@pavanky.com> wrote:

For example, the following commit fixes a bug

https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/cuda&id=09ae51b3d87b7cc8cce2bfd1026e711e29368a8f

But that change would require a 400+ MB to be downloaded when doing a pacman -Syu. The next version of CUDA is probably around the corner. I feel a fix then would have been easier.

I am not complaining, I can just do --ignore for now. I am just curios to know if this kind of stuff is thought about.

As Gaetan has mentioned, these sort of things usually depend on the maintainer. Now, I do agree that having some sort of consensus is good, but we can't really dictate every minor detail. I personally do delay updates if they introduce a little bit of extra baggage that some users might not want, but there's nothing in that which makes it a better decision than if I were to do otherwise. -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1