[aur-general] Suggestion of resource on AUR.

Pierre Chapuis catwell at archlinux.us
Mon Jan 5 18:31:47 EST 2009

Le Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:11:42 -0500,
Ghost1227 <ghost1227 at archlinux.us> a écrit :
> I agree that this is generally a good idea, although two weeks does seem 
> a bit short (especially around the holidays). As for instances where a 
> package can't be updated, perhaps a new flag could be implemented for 
> these situations? I've had a few of those situations myself and they can 
> be frustrating, so I suggest the possible addition of a "pending update" 
> flag or similar. Something that could give the maintainer the ability to 
> mark a package in such a way as to notify the community that although 
> the package is not functional, it is being looked into. Additionally, it 
> could potentially lock out the ability to flag the package out-of-date 
> to prevent packages in situations like this from being auto-orphaned if 
> the discussed auto-orphan idea is implemented. Thoughts?

Let's not add too much complexity to the AUR is what I think. I'm for auto-orphan after a month, vacations are usally not that long, and even if that's the case, one month without an update is too long.

What I would like to see is a "broken" flag and/or the possibility for the maintainer of the package to be notified by email of any comment on one of his packages (a bit like with flyspray). I often don't see comments on my packages saying that they don't build anymore because they were broken by another package's update.


More information about the aur-general mailing list