[arch-dev-public] Drop the unstable repository

Roman Kyrylych roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Sat May 17 06:36:17 EDT 2008

2008/4/21 Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de>:
> Am Sun, 20 Apr 2008 14:14:23 +0200
> schrieb Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org>:
>> I had this thought during the above discussion about compat-wireless:
>> Do we really need unstable? Almost nobody uses it and let's see which
>> packages are in there:
>> opera-devel
>> firefox3
>> kernel26mm
>> fvwm-devel
>> gimp-devel
>> reiser4progs + dependencies.
>> openoffice-devel
>> mplayer-svn
>> Most of the rest is so out of date and old that it should be dropped
>> anyway (including the external modules for kernel26mm). The packages
>> that are actually being maintained can IMO be moved to extra.
>> Everybody who installs a -svn or -devel package probably knows it is
>> unstable (firefox3 should be renamed to firefox-devel then).
>> So I'm asking you: What is the point of having a repository with <30
>> packages, half of which are neither used nor maintained? Except maybe
>> confusion among users (wait? enable unstable? isn't that dangerous?).
> opera-devel
>  - this is an exception only until there will be the first 64bit
>   release. later devel releases could be maintained in AUR
> openoffice-base-devel
>  - i really doubt it would be a good idea to maintain it in AUR -
>   compile time matters here
>  - it should stay somewhere binary (maybe even in extra or
>   permanently in testing) !

Just a remark: AUR includes Community repo too which is binary and
devs have access to it.
+1 for moving Unstable packages to Extra/Community/Unsupported

Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list