[aur-general] TU without [community] maintaining?

Lauri Niskanen ape at ape3000.com
Wed Feb 3 12:55:36 EST 2010

On 02/03/2010 07:48 PM, Lex Rivera wrote:
> The main reason why a asked for it is amount of crap in AUR. I have my own repo, maybe
> that's why i'm not interested in [community]. But AUR have huge list of
> orphaned, outdated, obsolette packages. Most of them can be deleted,
> since they have no use now. I see them nearly everyday, and... Well, i
> think you catch that. AUR needs moderators. AUR must be clean.
> Sorry for my bad english =(
> On 03/02/10 12:31, Angel Velásquez wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Chris Brannon <cmbrannon79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Thomas Bächler wrote:
>>>> I think it is a good idea. We could create the "AUR moderator" position
>>>> instead of calling it "Semi-TU".
>>> This is a fine idea, and I see no harm in it.
>> Im in favour of this, my unique concern is about how hard will be
>> creating another level of permission in the AUR, and some rules about,
>> if a semi-tu can orphan packages from TUs or TU-Dev, figuring out that
>> part, and assuming that will have an approbation, we will start
>> writting patches, so this can be a "slow" process, (2 months or so if
>> it's aproved? plus the time of discussion?).
>> Let's see what happens!
>> -- 
>> Angel Velásquez
>> angvp @ irc.freenode.net
>> Arch Linux Trusted User
>> Linux Counter: #359909
>> http://www.angvp.com

Let's start the cleaning here:

Maybe we should just delete all packages with no votes and that have
been orphaned.

-- Ape <Lauri Niskanen>

More information about the aur-general mailing list