On 22/06/2021 12:56, Sam Mulvey via aur-general wrote:
On 6/22/21 3:16 AM, alad via aur-general wrote:
There's 59 TUs looking after 70676 packages and moderating 85141 users. To make that manageable, you need some a strict set of rules. One of them is not submitting "-latest" packages that are already in the repos.
But the implementation is not uniform, and non-TUs must heed implementation as well. Both of these things are obvious, I suspect.
Not creating a thousand AUR packages when a maintainer is twenty minutes late incrementing gnome-pizza-maker is an unqualified good, but not having a community bandage when work on a maintained package is stalled but not abandoned for over a year seems less good. If the people behind AUR say that this is a situation where community tools are off limits, that's a notable surprise to me and I'll submit my mild objection.
Yes, I agree it's less good. But I did point out one bandage: posting something on the mailing lists if a package can be dropped to AUR. Of course the ideal solution would be to instead figure out how the new version can be packaged without vendoring.
FWIW there seems to be some upstream progress on that . If you use audacity on a regular basis, maybe you can help them figure it out.
P.S. Now that the discussion is there, I'm afraid we'll have to wait a little while longer for definite input. The Arch maintainer of audacity is on holiday until next week.