[aur-general] Popular new Chinese fonts looking for TU adoption

Grigorios Bouzakis grbzks at gmail.com
Tue Jan 29 10:14:36 EST 2008

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 09:40:27PM +0100, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> On Jan 28, 2008 7:14 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis <grbzks at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The above are a fine example of what i was talking about in my previous
> > emails on this list, stating that TU's  should provide as binaries
> > packages that the community wants and not only the packages they want to
> > maintain.
> > Here we have a TU who has uploaded 29 packages in community, without
> > getting them to unsupported first. One of his packages has 2 votes,
> > half of the remaining ones have 1 and the rest 0.
> > Yet he finds it very easy to reply when someone requests for some much
> > more popular packages than the ones he is maintaining to get into
> > community, that a TU should be interested in them to adopt them and he
> > should know chinese to maintain them.
> > As if Eric Belanger aka Snowman knows arabic, greek  and simplified chinese
> > in order to maintain his xpdf packages.
> > I dont  remember nor really care what the TU guidelines say about
> > this, but behaviours like this by "Trusted Users" IMO are not
> > acceptable. I clearly remember "Remember to vote for your favourite
> > packages! The most popular packages will be provided as binary packages
> > in [community]." though.
> > If the Guidelines dont state the above, IMO it should be added. The AUR
> > as well as the Arch community have got much bigger than when those
> > guidelines were written.
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
> I'm sorry but as much I understand the point you make, I'm with Bob on
> this one. I don't see any point in maintaining a package if I can't
> understand the language. There is no way for us to test the package,
> we can't even make up from the site if a new package is released, or
> the project is abandoned. Well, you get my point.
I see you dont comment on the fact that bfinch maintains ONLY his own
packages, which is the most important part of what i wrote above.
Can you tell me what good is a "Trusted User" who doesnt maintain ANY 
packages others have uploaded?
Since most TU's dont provide much code, and the ones who do will
logically become developers sooner or later, the least the community is
"expecting" from them is packaging binaries of the most popular
applications in AUR. As much as they can or feel like it of course.
Isnt that the whole point of being a "Trusted User"? Or am i missing
As i have said before i evaluate TU's and developers exactly the same
when it comes to packaging. As far as i know, there isnt a chinese
developer also. Yet Arch tries to provide multilingual support despite
that fact. Believe me, if you actually package such apps, users will
help you maintain them by submitting bug reports or tell email or 
comments etc if you screw up. When theres a will theres a way.

> Second, if you want to change the guidelines, become a TU. I really
> don't think you should have such an attitude without volunteering to
> become a TU yourself and do things better than we all are currently
> doing.
Regarding this part, i dont think one should be a TU to contribute to Arch.
I try to help as much and any other way that i can.
Personally i use like 5-6 packages from community, and only one of them
uses the same PKGBUILD as the one the TU has uploaded. All others are packaged
differently.If i was more interested in graphical tools or obscure
hardware and devices support and the packages in the repo in general, i 
would probably have considered about applying already.
I am assuming the guidelines were/are written by TUs but hearing someone 
elses point of view never hurt anyone.
Just like i try doing in real life too, when i see something thats IMO 
totally wrong regarding something i love/care a lot about i try to fix it. 
Or at least tell the ones responsible for it about my thoughts and ideas.
If you dont agree its fine.

PS. I have nothing against people and this not a personal attack. I am only 
objecting to they way some of them act, furthermore when they have a title.
Also just like in real life, people who have some kind of power are
subject to more critisism than the ones who dont.


More information about the aur-general mailing list