[aur-general] Official discussion period - Rules governing packages entering [community]

Daenyth Blank daenyth+arch at gmail.com
Fri Dec 5 11:51:06 EST 2008

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 11:26, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is something that was brought up by Thayer in a personal email to
> me, and I just wanted to throw this out there. This is my summary of
> _his_ thoughts, and not my opinion exactly.
> What we're trying to address here is not packages getting _into_
> community, but package _rot_ (ed: I *love* the term "package rot").
> That is, it's not the volume of packages going into community that's
> the issue, it's the fact that none of them leave. A package that was
> popular a month ago may not be popular today.
> Thayer proposed adding flagging for packages that would indicate: a)
> that it doesn't follow packaging standards and b) that it is "rotting"
> or no longer useful. This would do a few things: clean up the repo,
> keep TU motivation up, and still allow us to get new-fangled packages
> in the community repo.

I think I've also suggested a more versatile flagging system like he
describes in the past but I never filed a FR for it. I like his ideas
here a lot

More information about the aur-general mailing list