On 08/11/10 18:44, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 16:04 +0200, Peter Simons wrote:
Well, when a Haskell package is obviously out-of-date on AUR and someone offers to take over maintenance, then disown it and let that person handle the package. That's the way it's done for everything else, and the procedure seems to work fine. It's a mystery to me why the ArchLinux team deviated from that procedure for Haskell packages in the first place.
Take care, Peter
Wasn't there a Haskell update script that automatically did the updating?
I thought so... I think the reason we (Haskellers) got this special case for the Haskell-Hackage packages is we thought we had a cool tool that would do it all automatically, and everyone (Arch and/or Haskell I guess) was excited about it. But evidently something in the technology or the process stopped/didn't work quite that well (yet) (And until/unless it does, using the usual AUR rules on ownership makes sense to me.) -- I'm not sure what sort of obstacles remain currently: probably Don knows but is busy with other work... -Isaac