[aur-general] TUs adopting packages from the AUR
stefan-husmann at t-online.de
Sat Aug 14 16:06:10 EDT 2010
Am 14.08.2010 20:13, schrieb Loui Chang:
> On Sat 14 Aug 2010 19:22 +0200, Xyne wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:43:37 +0300
>> Ionuț Bîru wrote:
>>> On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote:
>>>> When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU
>>>> wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
>>>> I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were
>>>> 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was
>>>> nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
>>>> Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck
>>>> me as impolite, rude even.
>>> yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you
>>> or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our
>>> users to easy access their favorite applications.
>> Is that really how we're supposed to handle it?
>> In my opinion, a TU should contact the current maintainer in advance to
>> discuss moving a package to [community]. Simply taking the package is
>> indeed impolite, regardless of the number of votes.
>> Beside, the threshold (which I thought we had raised to 25 votes) is
>> just a guideline. It's not as though a package must be moved
>> immediately as soon as it has the minimum number of votes. Some packages
>> even end up with several times the minimum number yet remain in the AUR
>> indefinitely (which is a good thing, as an active and interested AUR
>> maintainer is better than a disinterested TU).
> The rule is that a package in unsupported must have at least 10 votes
> before being moved into community without discussion.
> There was a big 'so-called' debate about this awhile ago that resulted
> in one TU quitting.
But there nothing is said about contacting the current maintainer of an
AUR package. Maybe we should add that.
More information about the aur-general