[arch-general] Why not create a new repo specified for games ?

Karol Blazewicz karol.blazewicz at gmail.com
Tue Nov 1 16:34:48 EDT 2011

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev at umail.iu.edu> wrote:
> On (11/01/11 16:01), Calvin Morrison wrote:
> -~> 2011/11/1 Ángel Velásquez <angvp at archlinux.org>:
> -~> > 2011/11/1 Meyithi <mail at meyithi.com>:
> -~> >> I don't code, can we please move all coding tools to a separate repo so I
> -~> >> don't have to sync it?
> -~> >>
> -~> >> thanks
> -~> >
> -~> > You're a troll, you have a separate repo for you add it it's called [troll].
> -~> >
> -~>
> -~> Actually I think there is a valid point being made. If we created a
> -~> repo for [games] why not [browsers], [code], lets just get a repo for
> -~> everything!
> First of all, because this has already been done in openSuSE (a separete repo
> for texlive, for new KDE/gnome, for multimedia, etc...) -- not cool inho.
> Second, because compilers are needed for core system tasks, browsers are
> general purpose software, and so on. This is what [core/extra] are about.
> The point here is to separate apps not by purpose but overall quality. While
> you can argue all day long about creating (or not) a repo for security apps,
> games definitely fall into a [poor software] category which you can name
> [games], [communitty-extra] or whatever.
> --
> Leonid Isaev
> GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D
> Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE  775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D

Let's start by asking why we should change anything at all?
I'm aware of http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2011-October/016170.html
but Pierre warned against adding new huge packages, he didn't say TUs
need to drop some of the packages they currently maintain.
I'm not running a mirror and I have plenty mirrors to sync from in
Europe and I don't know how does the current repo structure impact the
mirror providers and users w/o any mirrors close to their location.

More information about the arch-general mailing list