[aur-general] TU Application: Dave Reisner
xyne at archlinux.ca
Thu Dec 2 16:59:50 CET 2010
Kaiting Chen wrote:
> In light of this new discussion however, I feel like the proper policy is to
> name a package without a suffix if there is a 'versioned release', no matter
> where this comes from (source tarball, vcs tag, etc.). Then the converse is
> that if a package has *no release* but just a rolling development trunk,
> then it is given a suffix. --Kaiting.
I agree with this. The "-vcs" suffix implies that you get the latest source
version of the package at the time of building, i.e. the bleeding-edge
developmental version (in the main branch at least).
Packages that are built from vcs but which are based on some form of upstream
"release" should not include the tag in the package name.
I think the simplest rule of thumb would be that if the same PKGBUILD generates
different binary packages depending on when makepkg was run, then it should
include the suffix in the name.
More information about the aur-general