On Donnerstag, 1. Mai 2008 12:23 Xavier wrote:
> I vote for simply dropping that repo.
+1
I think the first time about this and i must say this make the most sense from
view.
See you, Attila
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:40 PM, gan lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have community repo already, hand svn packages to community may work, but
> I still think it could be better to distinguish such packages from anothers.
> Unstable repo is useless if only a few people use it. Drop it if we can't
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Giovanni Scafora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The unstable repo is using svn now.
> Maybe, we could rename it to community?
As I said, it's not so simple. AUR needs a lot of work to integrate
with it, it has to understand svn commits and update pages
accordingly.
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 7:15 PM, Giovanni Scafora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 2008/5/1 bardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Why? It's true that we're all waiting for our own testing repo, but
> > using unstable won't help: the problem is AUR integration: a lot of
> > work still has to be done before
2008/5/1 bardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Why? It's true that we're all waiting for our own testing repo, but
> using unstable won't help: the problem is AUR integration: a lot of
> work still has to be done before community can move to svn, and then
> support for an overlay repo has to be added fr
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Giovanni Scafora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I vote for simply giving that repo to the TUs.
Why? It's true that we're all waiting for our own testing repo, but
using unstable won't help: the problem is AUR integration: a lot of
work still has to be done before co
2008/5/1 gan lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> As we know, many packages saying even firefox or openoffice in unstable repo
> don't mean "unstable", instead, they are quite stable. The name of repo
> simply doesn't reflect the fact, so how about a rename?
> It's harmless and may even bring some good point
gan lu wrote:
As we know, many packages saying even firefox or openoffice in unstable repo
don't mean "unstable", instead, they are quite stable. The name of repo
simply doesn't reflect the fact, so how about a rename?
It's harmless and may even bring some good point, at least from a marketing
po
8 matches
Mail list logo
