[aur-general] On TU application, TU participation and community/ package quality

Jakob Gruber jakob.gruber at gmail.com
Tue Nov 13 16:43:54 UTC 2018

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:10 PM Sébastien Luttringer via aur-general <
aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 2018-11-11 at 13:29 -0500, Santiago Torres-Arias via aur-general
> wrote:
> > ## Issues
> > * Existing Trusted Users are not followed closely in their actions, and
> the
> > quality of some packages for instance is more than questionable.
> Do you have several example to show?
> > * New applications are not carefully reviewed, and a several TUs seem
> > to  just vote “Yes” by default.
> From which facts are this assumption is built from?
> > * There is a general feeling of decreasing/not high enough quality in
> the
> > packages provided in the community/ repository.
> Idem. What elements do you have to support this feeling ?
> > * The implication of some TUs in the distribution is very limited
> outside of
> > packaging.
> What's wrong with that?

+1 to all of this. Some contribute more, others less, and in different
ways. My impression has always been that this is totally fine as long as
quality doesn't suffer. Not all TUs need to have hundreds of packages and
IRC / forum presence.

Found a bad or outdated package? Prepare a new PKGBUILD and send a quick
mail to the owner.

Think someone shouldn't be a TU? There are processes in place for that.

Votes have an 'abstain' option. That should be the logical vote if one does
not have a strong opinion / enough information.

IMHO there's really no need for governance structures.

More information about the aur-general mailing list