On 10/29/19 5:35 PM, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
I think we should probably start adding a few packages to that list.
Makes sense, we have the functionality so we might as well use it. The question is what criteria to use. :/
On that note, I'm in the middle of rewriting AIF-NG[0] to be a lot easier to maintain, understand, etc. (Plus it broke, and it needed to be rewritten anyways, so here we are.) (For those unfamiliar, basically a Kickstart equivalent for Arch.) Would that package name ("aif" or "aif-ng") be okay? The *full* name is "Arch (Linux) Installation Framework, Next Generation" but that wouldn't be in the package name, just the description. Is this enough segregation to be okay? (My hope is to get it good enough to be considered as adoption INTO an official package eventually, if that clarifies the case.) [0] https://aif-ng.io; docs haven't been updated for rewrite yet as focusing on code first. -- brent saner https://square-r00t.net/ GPG info: https://square-r00t.net/gpg-info