On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 16:30 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 09/05/10 16:08, vlad wrote: > > On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 01:09:46AM +0300, Ionut Biru wrote: > >> On 05/09/2010 01:02 AM, Andre "Osku" Schmidt wrote: > >>> Hello Arch, > >>> > >>> i'm doing (for fun) a PKGBUILD parser in javascript, and now as i was > >>> testing it with random PKGBUILD files from AUR, i noticed that there > >>> is more than one way people use to define authors... > >>> (/usr/share/PKGBUILD.proto shows only "Contributor") > >>> > >>> till now i've found: > >>> - Contributor > >>> - Maintainer > >>> - Author > >>> > >>> so i wonder what others should i parse ? > >>> or could you/we make a standard ? > >>> > >>> cheers > >>> .andre > >> > >> in proto was fixed in the next version of pacman. The standard is > >> Maintainer and Contributor. > >> > >> Maintainer the current person who's maintaining the packager. > >> Contributor past maintainers or persons who did contribute in a way > >> to the build(if the current maintainer wants to add them) > > Finally a clear definition! > > The main principle I use when deciding on things like this is the phrase > "Who gives a shit?". :P > > Seriously... it is a comment so it does nothing. Does either label > make it less informative if it is the only one there? > > Allan I see it another way, its the AUR, by definition some of the PKGBUILDs are going to mislabel things, especially in the comments. Perhaps I should edit my PKGBUILDs to say "Owner-And-Master-Of-This-Package's-Universe" instead =)
