[arch-dev-public] Repo Distinctions
jason at archlinux.org
Wed Oct 17 10:14:11 EDT 2007
> >> 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?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the arch-dev-public