Regarding what to put in the repository, I would use AUR and aurvote. I
(and whoever want to) could maintain some aur package orphaned by
archhaskell user. Packages that take some vote go in arch-haskell. I don't
know how many people use yaourt, but I do and I would like to have as many
updated haskell package in AUR as possible, if we can't have all of them in
arch-haskell.
Cheers,
Fabio
2011/11/13 Fabio Riga
Hello,
2011/11/12 Magnus Therning
It would be excellent if more people could work on keeping [haskell] up-to-date :)
However, splitting updating the database and the building of packages is likely to be a bit painful. So far my experience is that updating packages to a buildable state often requires a few iterations of modifying patch files and attempting builds. If each such iteration requires communication it's likely to drag out quite a bit. The ideal would be a build server really.
/M
why should we drop packages? Unless we are running out of space on the repository server we shouldn't. So I think we should find a solution to decentralize the building process. So a build server could be okay. Is it a problem to have a maintainer that check *some* packages, and not everything? The main maintainer should only put everything together, maybe periodically, so the others know when to submit updates and when to wait for the next one.
Are you sure this will be more painful than build everything by your own on your laptop?
Fabio