[aur-general] TU Application: Dave Reisner

[Cédric Girard]

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Dave Reisner <d at falconindy.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 05:13:56PM +0100, Cédric Girard wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Xyne <xyne at archlinux.ca> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > >
> > These two rules are not the same. For instance the package xbmc-svn [1]
> is
> > based on fixed svn version that does not corresponds to any "release"
> > upstream. It is just tested svn revisions (by the packager) as not every
> > revisions are usable.
> >
> > [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=20156
> >
>
> So doesn't that just mean that we have some packages currently in
> existance which break the guideline we're trying to establish? I propose
> that this particular package is named incorrectly, and would be better
> off as xbmc-devel.
>
> dave
>

Yes you are right I misread Xyne message and understood the two rules quoted
above as different. One is just broader than the other but there is no
contradiction between them.

-- 
Cédric Girard