[arch-dev-public] Repo Distinctions

[Damir Perisa]

Wednesday 17 October 2007, Aaron Griffin wrote:
 | This is definitely an interesting proposal. See, what we have here
 | is two clear camps that define [extra] different ways - packages
 | developers maintain, or packages the distro needs.
 
they are not really that cleanly separated camps.

sometimes the distro does not know what it needs but some devs do. 
devs are mostly men, mostly involved in IT business and mostly young 
people. do you know what pkgs are essential to a female scientist who 
does research in life sciences? if gimp is essential for the distro, 
then R or labplot is essential for the distro as well. :)

 | This isn't an attempt to compromise or combine those ideas, it's
 | an attempt to embrace them as different ideas. I think this is
 | great.
 
i cannot agree more :)

 | In reality, I like this distinction, I just think we should try
 | and use the repos we already have. Define [extra] the way you
 | defined [main] and let developers maintain their own packages in
 | [community]. But that's my opinion, and not too many people agree
 | with me on that one.

i don't. some pkgs need to be in a dev-official repo if not because of 
public relations reasons (ok, not only because of this reasons of 
course, but i think you know what i mean). 

- D


-- 
.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´
            °        °           °
             °      °            °
     ><((((º>      °              °
                    °            °
                   °            <º)))><
                  <º)))><