[aur-general] storming in for no reason with crazy ideas

Xavier shiningxc at gmail.com
Tue Jan 6 18:18:08 EST 2009

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, the TUs don't really have control over Arch Linux defaults.
> I think the idea behind community is that it's a bit of a testing
> grounds for future official packagers. So quality and usefulness
> of the repo is important but not as important as core or extra.
> Community is the bridge between unsupported and extra.
> I believe that correlation should remain pretty explicit as it is now.
> If community is brought on as another official repo, then the
> distinction between extra and community is eliminated.
> Why not just add those packages to extra then?

The distinction is exactly the same as now. community repo is managed
by a community of Trusted User, while extra is managed by arch
It is still a bridge between unsupported and extra. The only
difference is that on the implementation level, it would be closer to
extra, while now it is closer to unsupported. But on the usage level,
it is always in the middle.
And community can always be a testing ground for future official
packagers : as eliott said, it is even easier to switch from a
technical point of view if community is managed just like core/extra.

More information about the aur-general mailing list