[arch-general] arch health

[Insight Thekrab]

i thint it should be easier to let people help mantainers in software
packaging.

2017-04-20 2:22 GMT+02:00 Ralf Mardorf <silver.bullet at zoho.com>:

> Hi,
>
> I would be concerned, if too many security features not everybody needs,
> would become default. Why not dropping security features completely and
> instead making real-time optimised features the default? This is a
> rhetorical question, but actually I would prefer the latter.
>
> In my experiences Arch is very healthy.
>
> I doubt that many packages are outdated.
>
> Right off the bat a few come to mind, e.g.
>
>  claws-mail and clawsker
>
> but we had Easter holidays and some packages are already in testing.
>
> Other packages, such as e.g.
>
>  ardour
>
> are out of date for a long time, but the maintainer explained why he has
> got no time for a while. Apart from this Ardour is niche software.
>
> Each of the outdated packages I noticed still build using ABS or AUR
> PKGBUILDs by just changing the version and skipping or changing the
> checksums or they require minimal additional editing, if so I
> usually drop a note to AUR comments, how to fix the issue.
>
> It's hard to find much more packages I consider really outdated.
> I noticed that some packages from official repositories are flagged out
> of date, a few minutes after upstream released a new version, so I
> wouldn't count those packages.
>
> In my experiences Arch is a healthy rolling release. There are a few
> hiccups, but I experience less hiccups using Arch, than I experience
> serious issues with other distros.
>
> Regards,
> Ralf
>