[arch-dev-public] Drop the unstable repository

[Aaron Griffin]

On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 5:36 AM, Roman Kyrylych
<roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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 Most of the rest is so out of date and old that it should be dropped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

If anyone would want to go through the trouble of deleting/moving
packages in svn, I will gladly go and delete things on gerolde.