Joerg Sonnenberger<joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> writes:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 02:35:49AM +0400, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
We have many packages that do have distfile but don't build on some platforms.
This problem is definitly more important than having few packages of software
not as freely available to everyone as software from GNU project.
I think you missed the part where it is simply not legal to distribute
the distfiles. A large part of the cases here are simply useless if you
don't have the file.
No, I didn't miss that part. For some software you can obtain distfiles
by manually registering and downloading from some (not necessarily original)
vendor. Or you could have obtained the distfile seven years ago, and the
package still works for you.
Personally, if I would care about one of the
packages, I would keep a local copy and be done. Let's not talk about
messing up wip without a factual base, e.g. someone mass moving packages
just because they were created at some point and must be preserved.
I would do the same. Given that I have around 250 local packages already,
it doesn't matter whether I have one more or not. But that isn't the most
convenient approach. At least some people do consider it inconvenient.
In any case, this particular problem is definitly negligible, given others.
Solving it doesn't have any positive impact besides the percentage of built
packages in bulk build report.