[aur-general] TU application for sudoforge

Ben Denhartog ben at sudoforge.com
Thu Feb 17 21:28:22 UTC 2022

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022, at 14:22, Brett Cornwall via aur-general wrote:
> On 2022-02-17 11:59, Ben Denhartog via aur-general wrote:
>>No, it's pretty straightforward, but note that being "closed source" and/or "difficult to compile from source" are not qualifying factors for determining whether or not a package should be moved to community.
>>I'm not arguing that `kind-bin` _should absolutely_ be moved to community, simply that the parameters you're asking about are not pertinent to whether or not it is.
> To be honest, I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Are you saying that 
> software being closed source or with significant compiling difficulty 
> would have no bearing on their inclusion into [community]. Are you 
> saying that you would rather bring in binary releases into the 
> repositories?

Ah, I get the issue. Yes, the AUR package is a binary package; no, if it were moved to community I would not be downloading the release binary but instead building from source in accordance with the Go Package Guidelines [0]. I replied off-the-cuff while in a meeting and completely glossed over that aspect of the discussion.

[0]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Go_package_guidelines

> (BTW, please do bottom post on Arch mailing lists :))

Good catch :)

  Ben Denhartog
  ben at sudoforge.com

More information about the aur-general mailing list