[aur-general] Should TUs tolarate inapropiate behavior in the AUR?

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Sat Feb 13 14:25:42 UTC 2016


> On 13.02.2016, at 11:09, William Di Luigi <williamdiluigi at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's important to note: this is just the opinion of Ralf and Pedro.

that's a misunderstanding. I don't know if Det has got a problem. Det seems to behave strange regarding impressions from Dave and Pedro, but I don't know an evidence that Det does or does not. What I noticed is that users considered the comments as a discussion and support forum and I don't know how to value Det comments.

> I agree with taking a look at packages (I would add a "Flag as
> compromised/virus" link, which has a similar effect to "Flag package
> out-of-date").

Less is more...

> I believe it would be a good thing to address (with a code of conduct)
> *the possibility* of having misbehaving maintainers pressuring other
> maintainers. It's important to note, however, that this "pressuring"
> hasn't ever happened, until someone proves it happened.

....less is more....

....I guess we should add a few notes to the guideline Wikis, we even don't need a CoC.

Right now I don't have a good idea what exactly to add to the guideline Wikis.


More information about the aur-general mailing list