[Dev] PCR Cleanup

bill-auger bill-auger at peers.community
Fri Apr 17 23:43:36 GMT 2020

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 19:09:37 -0400 bill-auger wrote:
> doing so, entails nearly the same
> work-load as keeping them in PCR does - everything except for
> the final `librestage && librerelase`, which are the most
> trivial of the maintenance steps

it has been discussed many times in the past, to open an AUR
equivalent for parabola - i raised the issue once myself when
i first joined the team - fauno explained the rationale for not
having one; and it was essentially what i described - if
parabola hosts some software or recipe, then it needs to be
curated and maintained, and more importantly, endorsed (or at
least fit for the FSDG), or else it is pointless; and we should
not recommend any one to use them - regarding the FSDG, it makes
no difference, whether the PKGBULIDs were publish by users or by
the distro devs; so the conclusion that a parabola-hosted PUR has
barely no benefit, is practically the same

when you factor the initial cost of in license auditing and
packaging dependencies, and the on-going cost of maintaining the
PKGBUILD and it's dependencies, that accounts for 99% of the
work-load - when that is done, there is barely any reason to not
simply publish the binaries - you probably just built and
verified them all anyways

More information about the Dev mailing list