[arch-dev-public] Where [erxtra] ends and [community] begins

Roman Kyrylych roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Sun Oct 14 07:38:08 EDT 2007

2007/10/14, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com>:
> 2007/10/14, Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org>:
> > Pierre Schmitz schrieb:
> > > But the border between [extra] and [community] does not seem to be that sharp.
> > > Does [extra] only include the most important and essential packages? Is
> > > [community] only a playground and a repo full of alpha releases?
> > >
> > > Defining [extra] in a clear way should make it easier to cleanup this repo,
> > > too. We still have a lot of unmaintained or outdated packages.
> >
> > To me this is easy: The core/extra/unstable repositories are maintained
> > by the smaller group of Archlinux Developers, the community repository
> > is maintained by the larger and less strictly controlled group of
> > Trusted Users.
> >
> > This is the only disctinction IMO. Everything we don't want to maintain
> > due to lack of time and manpower will be handled by the TUs, who can
> > grow their numbers easily.
> >
> Yes, but developers also can (and some of them do) maintain packages
> in community.

IMHO Core and Extra should contain essential packages that are used by
majority of users.
But if some developer use some very specific niche package - it
shouldn't be in Extra, IMHO. Won't be Community or even Unsupported
enought for such packages?

Core/Extra means "official and well-supported" for most users.
While Community/Unsupported is kind of "50 text editors more and also
that nice Gtk theme".
That's my opinion.

IMVHO all games except those that are official part of Gnome and KDE
package sets and also rarely used scientific packages would fit
Community well, while can still be maintained by developers.

Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list