[arch-dev-public] rc.d files, unmaintained packages - and, the quality of our repositories

[Connor Behan]

On 16/07/13 04:08 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2013-07-16 10:40:24 -0700] Connor Behan:
>> Did you see my thread in arch-projects?
> Your message there does not say why you think adding netcfg back to the
> official repositories was a good idea; it merely states that you did so.
> Besides, arch-projects is the wrong list to discuss our repositories.
>
I have stopped using digests for this list now, so here's a better
reply. There are a few packages I can name and a few I can't that assume
the user runs systemd. So this makes it is a bad idea to upload a
different init system any time soon. However, I don't think there is
anything that assumes the user has netctl. As long as someone steps up
to develop it (which Florian seemed to encourage), netcfg should be no
worse an alternative than wicd or networkmanager. I used systemd+netcfg
on a server until this month and there were no issues. Even so, I put
the word "predecessor" in the pkgdesc as a warning. Yes it has bugs, but
so do a lot of [community] packages and the criteria for inclusion on
the wiki said "1% usage from pkgstats or 10 votes on the AUR." Pkgstats
would obviously be unreliable because of people who are slow to update
so I waited for the package to get 10 votes.

My rush to release it last night was a different story. I should've
removed the rc.d files (initscripts users get these from elsewhere now
anyways) and I definitely should've removed the base group. In case
anyone took my request on arch-projects seriously, feel free to reject
it now that you know it came from a klutz.

But honestly, netcfg was one Arch project that was actually useful
outside of Arch so I still think maintaining it would be a good use of
my time. And I thought I would force myself to dive into it by making a
release first and having a discussion after. I will be sure to ask first
next time if I ever think it's a good idea to release it again.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 555 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20130716/0448f3ba/attachment.asc>