[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]

On 5/7/19 1:13 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini via aur-general wrote:
> This thread went way beyond what it should have gone. This is the AUR
> we're talking about.
> I'm not saying we should accept any crap on the AUR, but, I'm talking
> from my own experience here,
> we don't always anticipate what will be useful or not to people.

In fact, the AUR is sort of by definition a place for people to
experiment with software.

> I have several packages I've put on the AUR that, even though I've
> followed the guidelines, I didn't
> expect them to be of any use to other people. And yet, they did. On the
> other hand, I have uploaded
> packages that I expected to be of use, and they turned out to not be
> that useful.
> 
> Unless we have a way to enforce the guidelines properly, I say that we
> should not bikeshed this much
> over AUR submissions. We have a lot of crap on AUR, yes. We have a lot
> of submissions that are useful to
> only one person, yes. We have packages that are not even for the
> architecture we support, yes. So, let's
> not dabble over a package that's not even the worse we have on the AUR
> *right now*.

Yeah, I think it is pretty disheartening that someone who has capably
packaged software for years is receiving so much flak over how he does
it, when everyone agrees that it's definitely useful to a whole bunch of
random ordinary users.

Because apparently ideological purity in the AUR. Even though no one can
actually suggest a better way of doing it that answers the
thought-provoking usability concerns which have been raised.

-- 
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/20190507/62f4815b/attachment.sig>