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 <rifabio@gmail.com>
Hello,

2011/11/12 Magnus Therning <magnus@therning.org>

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