On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 12:11:15PM +0200, Cayetano Santos wrote:
> 
> >dim. 21 sept. 2025 at 10:46, Steve George <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I’d say that when you contribute a new package, you’re more or less
> expected to take care of it afterwards.
(...)

In practise, it only happens sometimes. For first-time contributors in 
particular my impression is that they may not stick around. It's different as 
contributors grow and become more committed from what I've seen - particularly 
those who have signed up for a team I think.


> > [0] My personal opinion is we have far too many already and both developers 
> > and users
> > would be better off with a more focused set. And that we should implement 
> > the ArchLinux
> > like user community repository which would provide a place for a wider set.
> > [1] https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/fwknop#default,
> 
> Regarding this point, remember that ancillary channels (Aur like)
> would’n benefit  from substitutes, unless you set up a dedicated server.
> 
> That being said, and being an Arch user, I tend to agree: core + extra
> packages to concentrate on in priority (part of releases), with
> user (mostly leaf) packages on top of that, with support of the
> community.
> 
> Otherwise, it is beyond my understanding how to keep the pace on keeping
> up to date 30k packages, which roughly means 30k commits per month.
(...)

Well in a way AUR shows a good dividing line by not providing substitutes 
(binary packages) for these 'community' maintained packages. If it's important 
enough that users are downloading/building it enough then there's a case to 
promote it into the core distribution's set. The flaw in that argument being we 
don't have any stats on what users install so wouldn't actually know heh - but 
in principle ...

Steve / Futurile

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to