There is no "community" branch in rpm.

[community] is a repository in Arch, it contains a load of software

You can from the base level expect much higher standards overall.

right, it's aimed at a different market than Arch

Let's just calm down a little. :)

I'm calm, honestly

Because your discussion lasts almost an hour now.

right, it's aimed at a different market than Arch

Yes, people who dont want the headache of arch with the updates of arch

I'm calm, honestly

same

Because your discussion lasts almost an hour now.

eh, wow

Yes, people who dont want the headache of arch with the updates of arch

right, that's their decision

in fact, thinking about it I think an AUR like repo will work better for Fedora than it would for Arch

They shall do it. After being aware what a mountain of responsibility, knowledge, time and more will go into maintaining it or being helpless when it breaks if its your only machine.

stuff can be marked as compatible with fedora 25 and anything that isn't updated by 26 can be deactivated/unlisted

And i am just so fucking fed up by people recommending arch as serious choice for people that have barely ran ubuntu for a few days or outright beginners.

since Fedora doesn't adjust their package set that much between releases

And i am just so fucking fed up by people recommending arch as serious choice for people that have barely ran ubuntu for a few days or outright beginners.

no, same here

in fact, thinking about it I think an AUR like repo will work better for Fedora than it would for Arch

Feel free to write it :) We are in a free software world :D

And i am just so fucking fed up by people recommending arch as serious choice for people that have barely ran ubuntu for a few days or outright beginners.

It's sad though.

stuff can be marked as compatible with fedora 25 and anything that isn't updated by 26 can be deactivated/unlisted

Thats copr for you.

It's sad though*

i'm a community helper for Antergos (based on Arch) and we get so many newbie questions and people who don't even know how to use a package manager

no, same here

Thats why i am wary of people recommending it and trying to pull in the AUR as a pro - its a massive con for everyone who doesnt know his shit.

Doesn't Antegros have a graphical wrapper for pacman?

I think, Manjaro has it.

Feel free to write it :) We are in a free software world :D

I personally don't use Fedora ? might have done something like it if I did

And the 0,01% capable of maintaining it arent the ones it gets recommended to.

Doesn't Antegros have a graphical wrapper for pacman?

it ships with pamac, a GTK+ gui for pacman

Doesn't Antegros have a graphical wrapper for pacman?

It has i think.

I personally don't use Fedora ? might have done something like it if I did

In this case? What are we "fighting" for here? Stay constructive

Heck, i tested antergos but the first gtk update reliably broke it. XD

Thats why i am wary of people recommending it and trying to pull in the AUR as a pro - its a massive con for everyone who doesnt know his shit.

right, but the cons of the AUR mostly come because it's a moving target and you still need to set it up like any other Arch program

GTK updates are the worst, or, well, were the worst at 3.18-24

In this case? What are we "fighting" for here? Stay constructive

huh? we're just having a discussion, we're not fighting

Especially on rolling releases. GTK updates, theme doesnt, everybody cries. :)

right, but the cons of the AUR mostly come because it's a moving target and you still need to set it up like any other Arch program

And because its user-made unchecked input that almost nobody bothers to check in any way shape or form. I'm sure there is a ot of typosquatting packages there.

Welcome aboard, @awesomemrx

Especially on rolling releases. GTK updates, theme doesnt, everybody cries. :)

If it was just that. It loaded into a blank white unclickable login screen

Especially on rolling releases. GTK updates, theme doesnt, everybody cries. :)

that's a pro of something like Fedora, because the GTK stack doesn't really update a theme can be marked as ompatible with 25 and work with the entire release

that's a pro of something like Fedora, because the GTK stack doesn't really update a theme can be marked as ompatible with 25 and work with the entire release

Yeah, that is why I went from RR to more stable base.

If it was just that. It loaded into a blank white unclickable login screen

yes, we use the webkit2 lightdm greeter which depends on gtk+, i'm still vouching for an alternative

And because its user-made unchecked input that almost nobody bothers to check in any way shape or form. I'm sure there is a ot of typosquatting packages there.

it is user made input, but that's the point of the aur, anyone can pretty much plop a package on there

some of better quality than others, some broken

that's a pro of something like Fedora, because the GTK stack doesn't really update a theme can be marked as ompatible with 25 and work with the entire release

And since release dates are half a year and even then you get important updates after testing (the fedora kernel usually is ahead of the arch kernel despite way more QA happening) you get an almost bleeding edge system at all the pros of recent software and almost none of the cons.

stuff can be marked as compatible with fedora 25 and anything that isn't updated by 26 can be deactivated/unlisted

which is why i think this would work great for a large AUR-like repo for Fedora

As of me, I've tried both AUR and Copr. Yeah, there are problems of AUR packages breaking dependencies sometimes, though, it is true if you build the package by yourself as well.

which is why i think this would work great for a large AUR-like repo for Fedora

We have that already.

It is copr.

And since release dates are half a year and even then you get important updates after testing (the fedora kernel usually is ahead of the arch kernel despite way more QA happening) you get an almost bleeding edge system at all the pros of recent software and almost none of the cons.

i'm not here to pick sides, i think both sides have advantages and disadvantages

It is copr.

copr isn't 1 repo, it's multiple user maintaned repos

i'm thinking of a single, large AUR-like repo for Fedora

much like rpmfusion but user contributed

And I think I've used Copr repo once or twice, because that's the amount of times I needed it.

i'm not here to pick sides, i think both sides have advantages and disadvantages

advantage: users can upload whatever they want disadvantage: users can upload whatever they want concern: you get fired at my company for settling on arch over rhel/centos/fedora server even if you can prove why it was a better choice when you installed it

The biggest problem with AUR is that it doesn't scale. It needs an entire dev setup for it's packages and doing this on >100 machines in a company or something is simply garbage. it leads to way more problems than simply create a package on COPR and install it. And there is a good reason why COPR isn't one repositoy -> It's easier to maintain for those who run their copr repo.

advantage: users can upload whatever they want disadvantage: users can upload whatever they want concern: you get fired at my company for settling on arch over rhel/centos/fedora server even if you can prove why it was a better choice when you installed it

like i said, i'm neutral

VC321xb47@aperture:~#, you mean, more open for common people to upload and maintain.

advantage: users can upload whatever they want disadvantage: users can upload whatever they want concern: you get fired at my company for settling on arch over rhel/centos/fedora server even if you can prove why it was a better choice when you installed it

and yes, i agree you shouldn't run Arch in a corporate or workstation environment

VC321xb47@aperture:~#, you mean, more open for common people to upload and maintain.

yes

much like rpmfusion but user contributed

romfusion is user contributed. Someone just checks if you dont do malciious-script-from-domain | sh

romfusion is user contributed. Someone just checks if you dont do malciious-script-from-domain | sh

then i honestly don't get why coprs came into existance

and yes, i agree you shouldn't run Arch in a corporate or workstation environment

IMHO Arch is fine as playtoy to test complete bleeding edge that is so new that breaking stuff there might not even be down to your software.

Though, I think (idk if there is one yet), if there'd be a Copr manager software, maybe integrated in package manager, it'd not be much of a problem for users to use packages from there.

But for anything else (development for future versions - rawhide, stable development - latest stable) you're better off on fedora.

IMHO Arch is fine as playtoy to test complete bleeding edge that is so new that breaking stuff there might not even be down to your software.

to be fair i think something like gentoo is better suited for that

And for maintaners, there isn't much of a difference between uploading to one repo or to many small repos. Except if you maintain several packages, maybe.

to be fair i think something like gentoo is better suited for that

Making it target even less of a userbase.

then i honestly don't get why coprs came into existance

Because there are some people who want to write a *little* package without following all Fedora package guidelines.

ERROR: S client not available

Making it target even less of a userbase.

nobody said something about targeting gentoo

to be fair i think something like gentoo is better suited for that

Gentoo is, well, more hardware dependant.

As in, if you want to constantly have bleeding edge, you have to recompile stuff on every update.

Because there are some people who want to write a *little* package without following all Fedora package guidelines.

And you know how many law hellholes you can wade trough if someone else doesnt slap your wrist when including licensed software?

Because there are some people who want to write a *little* package without following all Fedora package guidelines.

but doesn't that automatically cause the bad packages phenomena?

So, you need hardware better than average office PC.

If you allow someone to upload sublimetext3-noactivation as legit packaged you have a few major problems.

but doesn't that automatically cause the bad packages phenomena?

Yes. Which is why i'm wary of allowing people to do so.

And why maintenance of such packages quickly becomes harder

Yes. Which is why i'm wary of allowing people to do so.

right, so a solution like rpmfusion but more open would be perfect

but doesn't that automatically cause the bad packages phenomena?

Since we educate everyone to avoid COPR, no. It makes it easy for admin to provide some small hacks to his environment.

right, so a solution like rpmfusion but more open would be perfect

It is completely open.

allow anyone to submit a package, run it through some checks on submit and update

Anyone can build a spec file for compilation and if it isnt a complete mess have it voted in.

Since we educate everyone to avoid COPR, no. It makes it easy for admin to provide some small hacks to his environment.

i mean if the packages don't follow guidelines it pretty much automatically results in bad packages

aks xvitaly who did a fantastic job on making telegram from rpmfusion a reality.

Anyone can build a spec file for compilation and if it isnt a complete mess have it voted in.

i think the 'voting in' part is the problem here

(which will never make it into main as it uses patented codecs)

i think the 'voting in' part is the problem here

Why?

(which will never make it into main as it uses patented codecs)

For playing mediafiles?

someone can't just submit a package and maintain it, it has to be added with enough votes. i would be put off by that approach, knowing i'd submit small packages that barely anyone but myself would use

Its the exact reason rpmfusion is a trustable source

someone can't just submit a package and maintain it, it has to be added with enough votes. i would be put off by that approach, knowing i'd submit small packages that barely anyone but myself would use

No, its not users of your package.

(assuming i get the idea right)

Its quality of your maintenance and spec file.

They dont care if you attract maybe 2 users if you provide a clean spec file and frequent updates.

For playing mediafiles?

Yes.

Its quality of your maintenance and spec file.

the reviewers 'vote' on your quality, then?

the reviewers 'vote' on your quality, then?

Yes

okay

And if you use official sources (git releases) rather than mydomain.lol/hackmehard.tar

right