Am Sa, 16.01.2010, 17:32 schrieb Thayer Williams:
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com> wrote:
On 01/16/2010 06:12 PM, hollunder@lavabit.com wrote:
Please have a look here:
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards#Submitting_Pack...
It says: Please add a comment line to the top of your PKGBUILD file that follows this format. Remember to disguise your email to protect against spam: # Contributor: Your Name<address at domain dot com>
This is wrong and should read: # Maintainer: Your Name<address at domain dot com>
you are correct.
It's a half-truth isn't it? I mean if if is the first time a package is being submitted to the AUR it *should* be Contributor and not Maintainer. The Maintainer should only be appended to the list if replacing an existing PKGBUILD. At least that was my understanding of it.
Hi all, My two cents: I think this "maintainer" and "contributor" stuff goes the wrong way and - for me - it does not make much sense how it is now. First I want to point out how I see it and how I understood it when I started using Arch. Adding a PKGBUILD to the AUR is a "loose" contribution to the Arch community (that does _not_ mean that one has no responsibility for the PKGBUILD). You made a PKGBUILD for yourself and think that someone out there might also find it useful. So you add it to the AUR as a community contributor. A "maintainer" is someone who actually maintains a binary package and/or has a trustworthy state, ie at least a TU. Now to the status-quo. I see no sense at all adding a person to the PKGBUILD who submitted it some years ago, because this person has nothing more to do with the "new" PKGBUILD, even if it hasn't changed. Perhaps he doesn't use Arch anymore. So why add him as a contributor? Only for the credits? For example a package like the "kernel26-n130" one. I took the config from the "kernel26-nc10" package, because it's almost the same hardware (ok, I made some changes); the PKGBUILD itself is built upon the stock kernel one. If it were for the credits then I'd had to add all the persons who contributed these packages, though they have nothing to do with this particular PKGBUILD. From this point of view taking care of all the credits would go much too far and blurs the idea behind a "contributor". Further when someone disowns a PKGBUILD for some reason, he also drops the responsibility for this package. So what's the reason of adding two or more persons to the PKGBUILD who actually don't have anything more to do with it? However, I think the most easy and clear way is to add a single name with mail address to the PKGBUILD - this means this person is in charge of it. AMEN