On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 02:51:23PM -0400, Eli Schwartz via aur-requests wrote:
On 6/24/21 2:39 PM, Morten Linderud via aur-requests wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 02:34:24PM -0400, Eli Schwartz via aur-requests wrote:
Well uhhhhh funny story that:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/PKGBUILD#arch
I know this is not listed in the rules of submission page, but it is in the general packaging guidelines, and it's not like we haven't been deleting packages in the past, for precisely this. The rationale being, the *Arch* User Repository is in theory supposed to be for packages which can be run on Arch.
It's the same reason we delete Manjaro-specific packages.
There is a difference between Manjaro, a derivative distribution, and someone providing a port of our distribution adding PKGBUILDs to the AUR.
What is the difference here, other than "we like you more"?
Are you going to tell archlinux32 and Arch Linux ARM "yo bois, get your own AUR?". What is the incentive for people to even consider contributing to our distribution then?
I don't see any reason to permit "raspberrypi-udev" but forbid Manjaro's pacman-mirrors script. Both of them are useless to Arch users, but do something on another distro (ALARM is still considered !notarch, after all).
Arch users use archlinux32 and Arch Linux ARM. Arch isn't *just* the x86_64 port.
Other than explicitly and publicly playing favorites. Is that the message we're trying to send?
Someone want to provide a port. Where in the world is that not enough reason to actually play on the same team? Why did we even help them coordinate the IRC network move? This is some silly strict rule abiding which isn't even grounded in actual submission rules. The discussion is continuing on the private TU list. -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16