Re: [Idea] Debian User Repository? (Not simply mimicing AUR)
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:12:07 -0400
- From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Idea] Debian User Repository? (Not simply mimicing AUR)
>>>>> "Marc" == Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Marc> On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:17:39 +0000, Mo Zhou <lumin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The design of .durpkg is permissive enough because the header
>> part, i.e. the shell script is fully controled by the user. In
>> this shell script, one could just copy the nearby debian
>> directory to the root dir of source tree, and/or optionally
>> unfold the trailing HFT part. Without the HFT part, every
>> file will only have one syntax. Template with an auxiliary
>> debian/ directory is missing but that doesn't mean it's not
Marc> Is there a vim mode (folding, syntax hilight) for that file
Marc> type? If not, then this format has a _significant_
Marc> disadvantage over the way we have been doing things for two
I think Russ has a good point here. There are some people who prefer
the single file format and some people who prefer the directory.
The current discussion is sounding a lot like sniping and if it were
directed at me I'd find it really frustrating.
It seems an area where it matters to the people contributing to the
project and basically no one else.
As a non-vim user, for example, I find the lack of vim syntax hilight
As someone who isn't likely to contribute to this project, my opinion
shouldn't matter anyway.
Mo has already indicaded that you can package up directories rather than
files. If you're interested in the project but would prefer to use that
format, then go do that and submit PRs.
If there are specific packages in the project you'd like to improve but
the format of that package makes it something you don't want to work on,
then give Mo that feedback.
Otherwise, I'd encourage you to let the issue rest.