[arch-dev-public] Repo Distinctions

[Jason Chu]

> >> Of course, if the argument is that devs should maintain packages in
> >> [community] because the distinction between devs and TUs isn't
> >> important, another solution would be to flatten things and have [core],
> >> [mantle] and [extra] and let TUs and devs maintain packages in [extra].
> > 
> > Another thing would be to have community integrated in extra.
> 
> This has always been my preferred solution. Heresy you may say, but just 
> sit back and think of it. Some developers prefer packaging work and 
> others prefer tool-chain kinda work. If we could clone those that prefer 
> packaging work, would it increase the amount of high quality and 
> maintained packages in [extra] ? (can i get a big "oh... yeah!") (mooo!)

+1 I agree.

> joking aside though. I think we just need to actually DOCUMENT a strict 
> packaging standard (this exists already. no?), and then open up the 
> flood gates to new upcoming would be _packagers_. No distinctions... 
> just one high quality highly udated repository.

Define strict packaging standard.  I'm just trying to figure out how
difficult this would be.  I've tried writing packaging tutorials before...
I got bored...

> > Separation of devs and TUs is not the same as separation of their
> > packages into different repos just by factor of package ownership.
> 
> I would say... _all_ packagers can maintain in [extra] but only 
> Packagers who are also Developers can maintain in [core]. After that... 
> maintain your own private repo or something. You say what about AUR? 
> I'll try to keep this post on topic, but i think AUR can actually become 
> the interface for this new breed of Packagers. 'noda post... 'noda day.

Isn't this sort of like what you were working on? and what Paul was working
on with repoman?

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20071017/e42edb8b/attachment.pgp>