[aur-general] Tarball Guidelines
ike.devolder at gmail.com
Fri Dec 3 19:55:38 CET 2010
On Friday 03 December 2010 19:46:10 keenerd wrote:
> Officially, the tarballs uploaded to the AUR should be named after
> their package, contain a directory named after their package, contain
> no dot files and most importantly contain no binaries. Officially,
> these requirements are very important.
> Here are a bunch of non-conforming packages. Maybe 90% of them. (A
> few errors slip though my scanner.)
> Of the +700 packages with binaries, most are a simple desktop icon.
> Should these be base64 encoded if someone can't find hosting?
> If no one can think of a better way to deal with the nonconforming
> packages, I'll write a bot to post insulting comments. Personally, I
> really like this solution. The AUR has always had a wild west
> frontier / insane asylum feel to it. The less regulation, the better
> it works. But a few well placed suggestions could help make the two
> thousand maintainers do a better job.
please send insults, i'll find my eventually wrong packages faster :p
More information about the aur-general