It creates syncing issues when things are upgraded. And Archlinux unfortunately has never dealt with the plagiarism issues when someone leaves let alone these syncing issues as a result.

Bob Finch


On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 1:53 AM, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 6:02 AM, w9ya <w9ya@qrparci.net> wrote:
> Aaron... you said you wanted people to host their own binary repos for
> little used packages in the very first emails about this subject several
> weeks ago. You have nothing since then to refute this.
>
> I am merely agreeing and was preparing to do exactly that. Daenyth helped me
> to do this after a TU irc channel discussion about your wishes in this area.
> People remembered them and everyone agreed that it was my decision to remove
> something as EVERY TU currently has that right and we have never voted
> otherwise.
>
> Also logically having PKGBUILDs in two places or even binaries in two places
> makes no sense for either Arch or myself because of support any "syncing"
> issues with pacman and in consideration of other long standing issues with
> plagarism.
>

If the PKGBUILDs are on AUR and the binaries in your repos, then
everything is is one place.
What is wrong with that?

That way, all users are still free to install packages in the traditional ways :
If the package is in an official repo (core, extra, community), then
he can install a binary directly
If the package is not in any official repo, then it should be in
AUR/unsupported and the user can retrieve the PKGBUILD from AUR and
build it.

On top of that, packages in AUR/unsupported could also exist in
unofficial binary repos, for convenience to the users who trust these
repos.