[aur-general] Where to put your name when you adopt an AUR package (was: TU Application)
abhidg at gmail.com
Thu Oct 9 13:56:36 EDT 2008
On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 10:25:23AM -0400, Daenyth Blank wrote:
> Regardless of what it once was, I think the current method is silly
> and needlessly confusing. Contributor should be there to credit the
> previous handlers for a package. Maintainer should just be the person
> who is currently in charge of keeping it working, whether binary or
> otherwise. Pacman's "Packager" data is kept for the binary files,
> making the current use of Maintainer redundant.
> I think it should be changed to the more logical way. Anyone else have
> an opinion on that?
While I agree with you, there are some cases where
Maintainer and Contributor overlap. Consider the following scenario:
1. X has contributed the package foo 1.0 to AUR
2. X orphans it after some time
3. Y picks it up, and adds Maintainer: tag.
4. Y updates the version to 1.1 after some time.
5. Y orphans the package.
6. Z picks it up. Now should Z
a) Replace the current Maintainer tag?
b) Replace and move Y to Contributor: list?
I think 6b) is better because it preserves history
and gives credit to everyone who worked on the PKGBUILD
at some point. While the Contributor: list can get
lengthy, I see no other way out.
Abhishek Dasgupta <http://abhidg.mine.nu>
GPG 67972DOF pgp.mit.edu
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the aur-general