[aur-dev] [AUR2] Need some feedback
xilonmu at gmail.com
Sun Dec 30 06:01:20 EST 2007
> I don't think general scm submission access makes any sense at all for the aur.
> Now, for backend storage, *maybe*, but that is debatable.
I think an SCM backend would be useful. Having a history of changes would help
if someone wanted to downgrade a package, or possibly even if someone found a
bug in it. Without the two-way interaction with the SCM I guess there aren't
any other benefits, and a history could be maintained via comments like it is
now (or a special History relation). I'd have to look further into the
advantages and disadvantages of implementing it this way.
> I think the AUR needs to get 'back to roots', and focus on doing the
> job it needs to do, and doing it well.
> I think extraneous features that people want to add to AUR2
> development should be punted, or forgotten altogether. Focus on core
> use and mainstream features.
Do you have any suggestions? I can't think of any other useful features at the
moment. I haven't actually implemented any of the community stuff, or user
management, so there's still more to dig into in terms of replicating features.
> ** Massive Sidebar **
> As a sidenote, I think the TU devs (community) should have a more
> custom arch-dev like interface (cli tools, flag out of date interface,
> etc), and not really be included in the aur at all. Alot of the TU
> functionality was somewhat 'bolted on', and wasn't ever really a good
> fit for the real core use cases of the AUR.
Suggestions would be very welcome. I'm not a TU or dev and therefore am not
familiar with the flow. I guess I'd have to setup AUR and possibly the main
site locally and see what's available. I still won't get any insight into
what's required or what would be better though.
More information about the aur-dev