[aur-general] Bundled applications policy?

Rashif Ray Rahman schiv at archlinux.org
Fri Dec 20 08:35:18 EST 2013

On 20 December 2013 04:20, WorMzy Tykashi <wormzy.tykashi at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 December 2013 18:44, Rashif Ray Rahman <schiv at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Just provide for and conflict with the relevant packages and you don't
>> give anyone any trouble.
> It's halfway there, it doesn't conflict with or provide theharvester
> package, though that's something I was going to mention when I comment
> about some changes they should make to the PKGBUILD (shouldn't be an
> 'any' package, binaries shouldn't be in /usr/sbin, etc.). I just
> wanted to check that such packages are allowed before prompting them
> to fix it up.
>> But if this whole thing is a package of a real
>> software collection (and not just a mash-up by a packager) then I see
>> no problem.
> It's the latter, the package pulls from two different, unrelated
> sources and merges them into one package. The only thing is, neither
> source is otherwise available on the AUR or official repositories (as
> far as I can tell).

A better way to rephrase what I meant is this: if it's a useful bundle
that people will use (if some people find the beta dep better), then
there is no problem. The "Arch way" would be to provide a separate
package for the beta dep instead, but you can tell if your idea (of
bundling) is working if nobody says anything about that.


More information about the aur-general mailing list