Honestly if there was a parser that would just inform us of our sucktitude ever now and then we would most likely become better maintainers.
I am all for the insults, diplomatic insults of course On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Ike Devolder <[email protected]>wrote: > On Friday 03 December 2010 19:46:10 keenerd wrote: > > Officially, the tarballs uploaded to the AUR should be named after > > their package, contain a directory named after their package, contain > > no dot files and most importantly contain no binaries. Officially, > > these requirements are very important. > > > > Here are a bunch of non-conforming packages. Maybe 90% of them. (A > > few errors slip though my scanner.) > > > > Of the +700 packages with binaries, most are a simple desktop icon. > > Should these be base64 encoded if someone can't find hosting? > > > > If no one can think of a better way to deal with the nonconforming > > packages, I'll write a bot to post insulting comments. Personally, I > > really like this solution. The AUR has always had a wild west > > frontier / insane asylum feel to it. The less regulation, the better > > it works. But a few well placed suggestions could help make the two > > thousand maintainers do a better job. > > > > -Kyle > > > > http://kmkeen.com > > > > please send insults, i'll find my eventually wrong packages faster :p >
