[aur-general] Maintainer vs Contributor tag let's find a solution ; )

[hollunder at gmx.at]

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:53:06 +0300
Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but here's my take:
> 
> - Maintainer: The person who currently maintains a package.
> - Contributor: The person who first submitted the package. If a
> package is so badly constructed that it needs to be rewritten from
> scratch, the contributor tag would only list the person who did the
> rewrite.
> 
> I know we've agreed on multiple contributor tags, but I believe the
> method detailed above is cleaner, more maintainable and more
> straight-forward. I'll most likely adopt it for my own packages, but
> I'm not saying that anyone else should.
> 
> I would say that we should hold a voting to make a final decision.
> However, it's not an important issue at all, so the current way of
> doing things (multiple contributor lines) is sufficient.


As I already mentioned someplace else it's still mixed up here:
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards

I'd love it if someone knowledgeable could go through that page and
could correct any other errors before I try to adhere to those
standards.

There are also other points that aren't mentioned there, like whether
one should use $pkgver or ${pkgver}. All the PKGBUILd.proto files use
$pkgver, I've seen both versions in wildlife.

/me is now off to edit contributor tags..

Philipp