[aur-general] AUR4, git, subtrees ELI5?
dpkaylor at gmail.com
Fri Jun 12 02:48:14 UTC 2015
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Eli Schwartz <eschwartz93 at gmail.com>
> Well, sure, git is fun. :)
> But tarball uploads means maintainers wouldn't have to go through any more
> hoops than they do already. Primarily, I am wondering what people who
> refuse to learn git *just* to contribute to the AUR might think. Any local
> abstraction tool would have to be fairly robust to deal with e.g.
> authentication, first-time updating a package that already exists, and in
> combination with transferring to another computer.
> vs. providing a compatibility layer over the old tarball interface, since
> aurweb already has everything else.
> -- Eli Schwartz
Yep, I was one of those people, briefly. Then I thought, "No, be
reasonable; this is Arch, things change. And Git could be useful..."
Anyway, you're right that the process would really not be any different if
there was a tarball creation tool. It might help ward off the "Not going to
learn Git just for this, so disowning" mindset. Hopefully, there won't be
to much of that, but who knows.
More information about the aur-general