[aur-general] Packages in Community and votes.

Loui Chang louipc.ist at gmail.com
Mon Nov 10 09:59:17 EST 2008

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 07:20:22AM -0700, w9ya wrote:
> I would like to remind everyone that the TU system was NOT originated solely
> to be based on votes, in fact there was no voting until much more recently.
> Also, when the voting was added to the TU system the community and TUs were
> SPECIFICALLY told that the voting system would NEVER be used to make
> decisions about or demands concerning what any individual TU decided to add.
> There WERE concerns that just this type of "accounting" would be used to
> determine how or what a TU may do. ONLY the TUs themselves make these
> decisions. It has ALWAYS been that way.
> BTW.... I am not sure why this happens every few months or so, but it is a
> repeating thought that somehow the voting system is a milestone setter and
> thereby an issue for the TUs. If there is something in the wiki or other
> documentation that would suggest or even say as much IT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.
> Guys, if this is not clear to you, a search of the older mails should yield
> a wealth of information about this from previous outbursts concerning the
> suggested requirments for TUs from the voting system results.

This thread diverged from: [arch-dev-public] pkgstats: first results

If you have packages in community with zero or one votes there is a
problem. You are abusing the resources of community plain and simple.

Your packages should definitely have one vote (yourself).
If you can't even garner one other person to vote there's not much point
in putting the package into community. You'll upload it to the server,
it will cost diskspace and bandwidth as it propagates through the
mirrors, and no one will use it.

Of course votes are not an absolute indicator of usage, but they are
somewhat accurate as pkgstats shows.

This means we need to change the way community is managed so we can make
more efficient use of our resources.

I've created a wiki page to outline my ideas:

Another point to consider is that gerolde (the Arch Linux server)
is already being taxed to the point where it is becoming unstable.
We can either try to do something to help the situation, or
we can protect some maintainer's pride of having 100 unused packages in

More information about the aur-general mailing list