[aur-general] TU Application: Dave Reisner

Ray Rashif schiv at archlinux.org
Thu Dec 2 15:55:39 CET 2010

On 2 December 2010 22:01, Kaiting Chen <kaitocracy at gmail.com> wrote:
> A little tangent but from this page it seems to me that a '-git' or '-svn'
> suffix should only be applied when there is a version of the package without
> that suffix in the name; this is to differentiate between the 'stable' and
> the 'development' version of the same package.
> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_PKGBUILD_Guidelines
> In his AUR page there are some packages with '-svn' or '-git' suffixes that
> do not have non-suffixed counterparts. Is this correct? I would like to
> update that wiki page to explain the convention more clearly. --Kaiting.

OK, let me get this right. You mean that when for eg. a software only
has a development source tree and no tarball, it should just be
'package' and not 'package-vcs'?

If so, I don't think that would be proper. If a PKGBUILD fetches
development sources, it should have a development suffix. However,
exceptions can be made sometimes.

Personally, I know of at least one upstream that does not directly
offer a tarball, but instead has (or rather had) an SVN tag that
distributors could check out. This package would then be named without
a vcs suffix.

More information about the aur-general mailing list