[aur-general] AUR GIT and Bug Tracker

Ido Rosen ido at kernel.org
Sun Aug 17 18:21:41 EDT 2014

On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Johannes Löthberg
<johannes at kyriasis.com> wrote:
> On 17/08, Ido Rosen wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Lukas Fleischer
>> <archlinux at cryptocrack.de> wrote:
>>> * Dynamically connect each AUR package to a repository, so that it is
>>>   easy to switch to a new repository if someone maintains a fork of the
>>>   same package somewhere. Means we are going to lose all comments, bug
>>>   tickets, ...
>> Why would you lose all comments/bugs/tickets?  Why do those have to be
>> in the same repository as the packages themselves?
> Because then we'd either need two repos per package or one repo that had the
> bug reports of all the AUR packages, both would be rather bad solutions.

Why would comments and bugs need to be managed in Git to begin with?
GitHub and other services do sometimes have a handy issues.git
repository (e.g. I can clone
http://github.com/ido/packages-archlinux.issues.git ), but I don't
think the backing store is Git in those cases...?  Having a Git
interface to that data is handy but does imply having a separate "git
repo".  Using Git as a backing store for comments/bugs might be
inelegant/not very KISS.  Also, to delete a comment in the comment
history if it's maintained in Git would you resort to a
non-fast-forward update?

Don't interpret my questions as discouragement, just seems like using
Git for *everything* is a bit myopic.

> --
> Sincerely,
>  Johannes Löthberg
>  PGP Key ID: 3A9D0BB5

More information about the aur-general mailing list