[aur-general] Should TUs tolarate inapropiate behavior in the AUR?
ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Sat Feb 13 20:08:11 UTC 2016
> On 13.02.2016, at 15:35, William Di Luigi <williamdiluigi at gmail.com> wrote:
> Mmm, but you said "at least one maintainer seems to suffer from
> something like a collecting mania", weren't you referring to Det?
I did, it was an unfortunate choice of words.
> The "compromised/virus" flag I'm talking about should be removable only by a TU/dev. This also means that while a wrong out-of-date flag is not a big deal, a wrong compromised flag should yield harder consequences, in order to avoid abuse.
Maybe this isn't needed and asking for unintended wrong usage.
> On 13.02.2016, at 18:43, P. A. López-Valencia <vorbote at outlook.com> wrote:
>> El 13/02/2016 a las 9:25 a. m., Ralf Mardorf escribió:
>> ....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. Regards, Ralf
> I agree, we don't need a CoC, but we do need some tools to communicate
> this kind of toxic behavior to the right people. In private if necessary.
Mediators reachable by email would be good.
Regarding what to add to the Wiki and my original thread, I wonder if my claim is correct, even if a package build from AUR suffers from a soname issue, then it's _not_ out of date, since users need to care on their own to rebuild an AUR package, assumed a lib from official repos gets update and the AUR package is build against this lib.
I didn't read the current AUR guides and will do it later. Perhaps the guides need a summary, they might be too long.
> On 13.02.2016, at 20:49, P. A. López-Valencia <vorbote at outlook.com> wrote:
>> El 13/02/2016 a las 5:09 a. m., William Di Luigi escribió:
>> Again, it's important to note that these other maintainers gave no proof of harassment yet.
> WE, Dave Blair and I, BOTH SAID THE HARASSMENT WAS DONE *PRIVATELY*, yet
> you are asking for public proof?
I guess we shouldn't continue the discussion about this maintainer.
More information about the aur-general