[arch-dev-public] TU application process
bpiotrowski at archlinux.org
Tue Nov 6 12:32:13 UTC 2018
On 06/11/2018 12.13, Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Yeah, but [community] used to be something completely separated from
> [extra]. This is less and less the case (numerous packages were moved
> from [extra] to [community] so that TUs could maintain them for
> instance). The line between devs and TUs has become quite blurried, and
> in my opinion who we accept as TU is highly depending on the meaning we
> have for those repos and roles. I think devs should thus be concerned by
> the quality of what we have in [community].
Or we should start caring about repo hierarchy again, and keep [core]
and [extra] independent.
> Here again I would argue that they are devs that have [core] pushing
> rights, as well as devs that are Master Key holders. So even if you
> don’t want to write this black on white, this actually means a small
> group of people have the real control over the distro (technically,
> Master Key holders could revoke everyone else).
You can argue, but it's simply not true. Any developer has access to
[core]. Master key holders aren't considered any better than other
developers besides having more duties and no one has ever refused to
sign new TU; for every master key holder, there is someone else holding
revocation certificate. There is no hierarchy.
> Because you think Arch work, we (as some TUs/devs) think they are a
> number of issues.
Any sort of council would be a big turn-off for me not just now, but
also years ago when I joined TU ranks first.
> Thanks for your input, and this is the kind of opinions for which I said
> we should have this discussion here.
Personally I'm not interested in this either and I find it difficult to
find anything substantial in Christian's message indicating that
discussion should take place on arch-dev-public and not aur-general. I
know anthraxx is preparing actual outline but it's really bad way to
More information about the arch-dev-public