On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Daenyth Blank <daenyth+arch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2009/4/6 <hollunder@xxxxxx>: >> On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 00:37:14 +0200 >> Ondřej Kučera <ondrej.kucera@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Arch's packages usually (almost always) get updated pretty fast and >>> the system "don't create a bug report, just flag the package out of >>> date to get dev's/TU's attention" works fine. But sometimes there >>> exist packages both in community and in extra (I'm not sure about >>> core but maybe even there) that don't get updated even after a >>> significant time from the upstream's release (e. g. swt, amarok, jre >>> or jdk from the nearest past). Shouldn't there be a time limit (two >>> weeks? a month?) after which it would be OK to create a bug report? >>> That way there could be a discussion about why that package >>> hasn't/couldn't be updated and everyone would know where to look for >>> the reasons without having to go through mailing list archives, bbs >>> and so on. >>> >>> Just a thought though. >>> >>> Ondřej >>> >>> >> >> I wondered about that as well. >> For example jack-audio-connection-kit, qjackctl and ardour, all in >> extra, have been out of date at least since I joined arch, and I >> believe this was around October/November. Mailing the maintainer didn't >> help. >> >> Philipp >> > Send a mail to the mailing list if the maintainer doesn't respond > (preferably attach the PKGBUILD you updated) This is probably the best way - send an updated PKGBUILD that you've personally tested and you know works fine. This is generally how I've been doing gnucash anymore, as I stopped using it, but I get regular updates from people who like the package and test it If you're looking for "multiple maintainers", this is probably the best way, even if it is informal
