On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 12:18:08AM +0100, Xavier wrote:
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Loui Chang email@example.com wrote:
Well, the TUs don't really have control over Arch Linux defaults.
I think the idea behind community is that it's a bit of a testing grounds for future official packagers. So quality and usefulness of the repo is important but not as important as core or extra.
Community is the bridge between unsupported and extra. I believe that correlation should remain pretty explicit as it is now. If community is brought on as another official repo, then the distinction between extra and community is eliminated. Why not just add those packages to extra then?
The distinction is exactly the same as now. community repo is managed by a community of Trusted User, while extra is managed by arch developers. It is still a bridge between unsupported and extra. The only difference is that on the implementation level, it would be closer to extra, while now it is closer to unsupported. But on the usage level, it is always in the middle. And community can always be a testing ground for future official packagers : as eliott said, it is even easier to switch from a technical point of view if community is managed just like core/extra.
Well with that, I was answering the desires of some people to have community thrown in the same lot with core and extra. Like having packages listed from the main website rather than aur.archlinux.org for example.