[aur-general] Community and the AUR (Was: Vote - Moving [community] to use same system as main repos)
louipc.ist at gmail.com
Mon Jan 26 23:51:31 EST 2009
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 10:20:10PM -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 10:19:21AM -0500, Daenyth Blank wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 00:59, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:
> >> > Any other people want to comment on this? Any TUs feel keeping AUR pages
> >> > for [community] packages is necessary?
> >> >
> >> > Allan
> >> >
> >> I'd like to keep them. Especially if we get smooth non-destructive
> >> transitions moving a package from community to unsupported.
> > Hmm it seems like all it takes to move a package from community to
> > unsupported is to upload the tarball with buildscripts via the AUR
> > interface (pkgsubmit.php). Votes and comments are preserved.
> > So if we're doing a clean up, we can disable tupkgupdate to be safe.
> > tupkgupdate only runs a minute after the hour every hour.
> > It shouldn't be a problem really.
> So are you suggesting that all community packages will also exist in
> unsupported? If we're going to go that route, why not integrate the
> AUR with the abs tree - seems there'd be no need to upload anything
> that way, and there' be no file duplication.
Oh I'm just saying if we do a clean up before the transition
that it's pretty easy to move a package to unsupported, and we won't
lose any data for those packages transferred.
Yeah the running policy is for no duplication.
More information about the aur-general