[aur-general] Proposed rules for packages entering [community]

Allan McRae allan at archlinux.org
Mon Dec 1 04:27:34 EST 2008

Firmicus wrote:
> I basically agree that we need some form of control.
> However I have some reservations and comments.
> First, I would like to understand the usefulness of discussing and 
> voting on this proposal first, before tackling the (IMO probably more 
> serious issue) of having too many packages with very low popularity / 
> usefulness in our community repo. Perhaps the former issue is easier 
> to deal with? Or could serve as a basis for dealing with the latter one?

Paving the way...  Basically stop the problem getting any worse first.  
Then do the real fixing.  This is probably also the least controversial 
of the two.

> Now to the specific points of the proposal:
>> * Only "popular" packages may enter the repo, as defined by 1% usage 
>> from pkgstats or 10 votes on the AUR.
> Allan, can you develop a bit more what is your criterion for the 
> figures 1% or 10 votes. Why not 5% or 3 votes? (which in my humble 
> opinion would seem to make more sense...)

I just liked the minimum of 1% for community.  Ten votes comes from 
looking at the number of votes best at discriminating packages  with 
more or less than 1% of usage.  In fact any number between 10 and 20 
does quite well but people told me 20 was really too many...

>> * Any additions not covered by the above criteria must first be 
>> proposed on the aur-general mailing list, explaining the reason for 
>> the exemption (e.g. renamed package, new package) at which point a 
>> general consensus from the TUs will be reached. TUs with large 
>> numbers of "non-popular" packages are more likely to be rejected. 
> What should a "general consensus" look like? If 5 TUs are for and 3 
> are against and the remaining ones do not reply, do we say yes or no? 
> Can we be more specific on the above point without burdening the 
> procedure with bureaucratic rules?

That is the main thing that needs defined before I call for a vote.  I 
really want others ideas on this.  Perhaps agreement of 3 other TUs.

>> Stefan Hussmann wrote:
>>> Some thoughts. - If we encourage people to drop packages that are 
>>> not popular, we
>>> should also encourage them to take packages in "usupported" that _are_
>>> popular to "community".
>> That would be the idea.
> I have examined the repos extra, community and unsupported quite 
> carefully, and as a result I do not think there are that many packages 
> in unsupported that really deserve being in community! Possible 
> candidates are
> yaourt, etc: but only if wain would become a TU AND if we think it is 
> a good idea to support that very popular tool (not sure personally – 
> also it is only a script, so easy to install).

Remember we do not support automatic building from unsupported

> aurup

Do we support AUR uploaders?

> nspluginwrapper-flash + dependencies > well, these are no longer 
> required I believe
> splashy
> wine-doors
> songbird

There are license issues with the icons there.  Also, last time I 
checked it would not build from source without patching xulrunner in 
ways mozilla devs are against.  Otherwise I would have it there now!

> <enemy-territory, warsow, openarena etc. : if TUs are interested>

Daenyth and others have an arch-games unofficial repo with many games in it.

> uswsusp
> customizepkg
> pactools

A few scripts in that package are now part of pacman (orphan detection) 
and others are in the official pacman-contrib scripts. 

> archassistant
> vlc-plugin
> fbsplash
> Otherwise, I would rather VERY MUCH encourage TUs to have a look at 
> the packages in EXTRA that are currently orphaned, and to contact the 
> devs if you are interested to maintain some of them in community. 
> There are many more important packages there that would deserve to be 
> maintained in community than being orphaned in extra.
> That's it for now.
> F


More information about the aur-general mailing list