[aur-general] AUR Improvement Thread

Lukas Fleischer archlinux at cryptocrack.de
Wed Nov 17 11:12:05 CET 2010

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:17:33PM -0500, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> 1. Integrated distributed version control system

Why would we need that? Keep it simple. People can setup their own repos
if they want, just as I did [1].

> 2. User provided binaries (if case anyone wants to volunteer) (this should
> probably be carefully controlled)

Hm, basically the problem with that is that people would need to trust
every user uploading packages to the AUR just as they trust TUs or devs.
There would be no easy way to check if a package contains malicious

> 3. Time-adjusted 'relevance' measure (votes are useful but suck at the same
> time; nobody cares if a packages was upvoted 9000+ times a million years
> ago, especially if it's already been obsoleted by something else)

If something has been obsoleted by something else, people can just
mention that in the comments and/or send a mail to aur-general (as they
always did). TUs will have a look at it then and remove it. That's so

> 4. An official client

Why? There is a huge number of clients that work well. I personally
prefer to download AUR packages manually, build using makepkg(1) and use
aurploader to upload stuff, some others prefer pacman wrappers, some
others rather use aurbuild/makeaur. Why shouldn't we just let people
decide how to do it? Isn't the "do-it-yourself" approach part of the
Arch Philosophy?

> 5. LDAP support because LDAP makes everything so much better

Hm. I'd be fine with that, but it isn't a must. The main problem is,
that it's not easy to implement. We had that discussion before. But if
you want to put much effort in integrating it everywhere in a clean way
and also agree to maintain it, you'd get a yes from me :)

[1] http://git.cryptocrack.de/?p=archlinux-packages.git;a=summary

More information about the aur-general mailing list