[aur-general] Should I bring rpm/dkpg to community

[Ray Rashif]

We shouldn't disqualify something just because it's "that something" (:
They're being excluded not because they have relation to "debs and rpms",
but because they fall in the same paradigm as tools like yaourt, well
somewhat at least. We already have - for administrative purposes -
rpmextract and checkinstall.

Wow, this one's received a lot of attention in such a short time. Infamous
is the word, hate is the subject?

On 06/04/2008, Loui <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:45:07 +1000
> Allan McRae <mcrae_allan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi TU's,
> >
> > I was wondering what peoples opinions are about putting rpm/dpkg in
> > [community].  They both have a descent number of votes (27 & 33) so
> > people obviously find them useful.  Does anyone have objections about
> > their "unArchness" (it is a real word, honest!)?  It is what has stopped
> > me moving dpkg so far...
>
>
> Hi. I'm not a TU but can I state my opinion too?
> I would say NO. A resounding unequivocal NO to rpm and dpkg.
> Heh. I even have objections about them being in [unsupported].
>
> Sorry if I interrupted the conversation, but I couldn't resist.
>
> Cheers.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20080407/8e5d6fc6/attachment.htm>