[aur-general] Are AUR VCS packages that depend on AUR VCS packages from other projects a good idea and who should decide on that ?

Eli Schwartz eschwartz at archlinux.org
Tue May 7 17:42:05 UTC 2019

On 5/3/19 11:41 AM, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2019 11:32:57 -0400
> Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Apparently, he *really* thinks that that is a bad idea and an inferior
>> mesa-git experience.
> And apparently the mesa developers disagree. Remember how this thread started.

This logic is automatically invalid, no ifs ands or buts.

Upstream developers *by definition* have different priorities from
downstream users. Furthermore, the world is full of projects run by
upstreams who have unrealistic and sometimes ridiculous expectations;
anyone who has packaged a lot of software should know this.

If the mesa developers disagree, that's fine. But it doesn't actually
mean anything. What would mean something is their rationale for
disagreeing. Just like any other upstream software.

So far all I've seen are vague, shadowy statements being thrown around,
and a whole lot of judging going on based on these shadowy statements.
That's not good enough for me to accept "but muh authority as upstream
dev" as an instant-win argument which refutes all comers.

Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1601 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20190507/2a7603ef/attachment.sig>

More information about the aur-general mailing list