[aur-general] Adding AUR packages to [community] packages' provides

[Xyne]

Lukas Fleischer wrote:

> Well, I'm addressing current blacklisting issues with the AUR [1].  I
> noticed that some of the packages in the official repos have AUR
> packages as provides, some of them (well, at least one of them, didn't
> search for more) were even added due to FRs [2]. Donnu if this applies
> to [core] and [extra] as well.
> 
> Is that regular practice? Imho, we shouldn't do that. The AUR is
> something to be considered separately. If we start to care about
> provides/conflicts with AUR packages, we'll need to add all
> "-devel"/"-svn"/"-git"/"-beta" packages in the AUR to the official
> packages conflicts and provides as well. And we'll need to start
> searching for alternative repos to ensure there's no conflict with our
> official packages.
> 
> Seriously, we should be consistent here.

Maybe that's unintentional. It could be a simple matter of forgetting to update
the PKGBUILD when moving the package from AUR to [community].


> The AUR is something to be considered separately.

I agree that the two should be considered separate, but officially they're not:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2011-February/013403.html