[arch-dev-public] Repo Hierarchy for Makedepends

Rashif Ray Rahman schiv at archlinux.org
Thu May 10 10:23:12 EDT 2012

On 10 May 2012 18:48, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:44 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Am 10.05.2012 03:28, schrieb Allan McRae:
>>> Do we care about makedepends being in repos lower down the hierarchy?
>>> The current Integrity Check email lists >170 issues in this category.
>>> If these are never going to be addressed, I suggest we remove it from
>>> the output so that the more important errors are focused on.
>> It is impossible to respect these unless you want to considerably blow
>> up [core].
> We can always make an exception for the [core] packages, especially if
> the makedepends have other (make)depends in extra/community.  If we do
> something about it, we need to decide if the [core] repo can have
> makedepends in [community] or just in [extra].
> If we move packages from community to core/extra, we need to be sure
> that it will have a maintainer (like the maintainer of the packages
> which makedepends on it, for example).  It wouldn't make sense to move
> packages currently maintained by a TU in community to another repo
> where it will remain orphaned.

We should have some sort of policy. Like this one for e.g.: If there
is no other (make)depend in that repo you might want to promote it for
the package that needs it in a higher repo, provided that there will
be a maintainer in the new repo.

Personally, I'd like it if each repo were made to be 'self-sufficient'
(that is, include pkgs required at build time).


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list