"No" (for non-technical reason): For me it looks like an encouragement or even invitation to use AUR directly, which -- in an ideal world -- should be avoided (see kpcyrd's letter above).
"Yes" (for non-technical reason): Newcomers will use AUR anyway, so it's a good opportunity to educate them a bit. > users not aware of the risks, should be clearly informed of the "dangers" For me "cleary informed" means not just using general non-informative waringns "not officially supported" and "use at your own risk", but some explanations like in the mentioned kpcyrd's letter. I.e. users should be aware of all that .so dependency business and Python troubles, and understand that they do not use Arch Linux anymore, but some kind of their own "Arch Linux downstream" distribution. Importance of paru's "localrepo" and "chroot" features (and similar features in other helpers if/when they will be added to archinstall) should be explained too. "I don't care": I customize ISO (because I need ZFS kernel modules up and running), so I already have AUR helper on it just in case:) And it is not really needed anyway, because I use local repository (at least, for packages which are important for me) to avoid troubles with dependencies. --- Andrei
