[aur-general] mistake in packaging guidelines

Thayer Williams thayerw at gmail.com
Sun Jan 17 02:35:59 EST 2010

On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 6:58 PM,  <vla at uni-bonn.de> wrote:
> Further when someone disowns a PKGBUILD for some reason, he also drops the
> responsibility for this package. So what's the reason of adding two or
> more persons to the PKGBUILD who actually don't have anything more to do
> with it?
> However, I think the most easy and clear way is to add a single name with
> mail address to the PKGBUILD - this means this person is in charge of it.

I don't see this as an issue that's worthy of debate so I won't
comment much on the matter myself.  Others may disagree...

Personally, I feel it's important to give credit where credit is due.
IMO it doesn't matter whether someone orphans a PKGBUILD, they still
deserve credit for their initial efforts in creating/maintaining it.
I also believe it's valid for non-TUs to be considered "maintainers"
within the AUR.  They are in effect maintaining the package, even if
it's only a build script. Should the package later be adopted by a
dev/TU then the initial maintainer should be credited for their
contribution.  That's just good business in my opinion.

Maintainer == current custodian of the PKGBUILD and/or binaries
Contributor == one who has previously contributed to the maintenance
of said PKGBUILD and/or binary

More information about the aur-general mailing list