On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:53:13PM -0500, Loui Chang wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 06:47:32PM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
The explain that bfinch shows is not the case, as I said (second time this day), there is an amount of packages (aspell,i18n related) which break the rule about "votes needed". I mean, maybe there is not chinesse support in Arch Linux, but why if we got a TU or Dev who speaks chinesse and he wants to move chinesse language packages to community?, he won't be able cause the packages aren't enough voted? this is very unfair, and that's why I think votes isn't the unique point to focus when a package is moved to community. I understand the fact about moving -non-popular or unuseful- packages to community and waste resources, is bad, and I know that exists hundres of packages without votes, IMHO the correct way to handle this is simply, the TU who add packages with very few votes should give a good reason about why he did it, and in case other TUs aren't agree the TU who upload the package should find better reasons, and try later. And again *language packages break the rule* simply.
Thanks
Yeah I agree there should be room for some exceptions. Dependencies would be the obvious exceptions, and maybe perhaps i18n packages should be included as well (optdepends?).
I've included the exception for i18n packages in: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community