[aur-general] pkgstats and community - attempt 2

[Ronald van Haren]

2008/11/11 Ondřej Kučera <ondrej.kucera at centrum.cz>:
> Hi,
>
> Allan McRae wrote:
>>
>> So lets start there.  What should the [community] repo be doing?  What is
>> its purpose?   There is no point discussing anything else until that is well
>> defined.
>> All responses must start with "The [community] repo is ..."
>
> The [community] repo is - in my non-dev, non-TU very humble opinion - a
> repository for packages that are perhaps not as widely used as those in
> [core] or those in [extra] but still used by enough users, so that it's
> reasonable to provide them in binary form, providing that there is a way to
> do so. I always figured that there is only so many devs and only so many
> packages a single dev can maintain, which leads to a limited number of
> packages in [core]/[extra]. That's why there are TUs and that's why there is
> [community] - so that the number of packages provided in binary form (by
> people that hopefully can be trusted) is larger.
>
> But what I actually wanted most to say was "amen" to your e-mail, Allan, I
> think you've summarized feelings of many people...
>
> Ondřej
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Ondřej Kučera
>

IMO all that but without your last argument. Quite some TUs are also
Devs at this very moment, so for the workload for them it doesn't
matter. Still most of the packages they maintain should stay in
community. Packages in community should be there because they are used
by quite some people, but not enough to have them in extra, or
packages that are a hype and have to prove that they are there to stay
before they are put into extra (bmpx in extra comes to mind which
development has stopped after like little over 1 year (?),just an
example to make clear what I mean). Alpha software (for example e17)
should also never be included in extra IMO (though some packages may
not follow this rule if needed).

Hope it is clear enough, it's already late :p

Ronald