On Jan 28, 2008 7:14 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis <grbzks@gmail.com> wrote:
The above are a fine example of what i was talking about in my previous emails on this list, stating that TU's should provide as binaries packages that the community wants and not only the packages they want to maintain. Here we have a TU who has uploaded 29 packages in community, without getting them to unsupported first. One of his packages has 2 votes, half of the remaining ones have 1 and the rest 0. Yet he finds it very easy to reply when someone requests for some much more popular packages than the ones he is maintaining to get into community, that a TU should be interested in them to adopt them and he should know chinese to maintain them. As if Eric Belanger aka Snowman knows arabic, greek and simplified chinese in order to maintain his xpdf packages. I dont remember nor really care what the TU guidelines say about this, but behaviours like this by "Trusted Users" IMO are not acceptable. I clearly remember "Remember to vote for your favourite packages! The most popular packages will be provided as binary packages in [community]." though. If the Guidelines dont state the above, IMO it should be added. The AUR as well as the Arch community have got much bigger than when those guidelines were written.
Greg
I'm sorry but as much I understand the point you make, I'm with Bob on this one. I don't see any point in maintaining a package if I can't understand the language. There is no way for us to test the package, we can't even make up from the site if a new package is released, or the project is abandoned. Well, you get my point. Second, if you want to change the guidelines, become a TU. I really don't think you should have such an attitude without volunteering to become a TU yourself and do things better than we all are currently doing.