You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
By default the packages are in a big long alphabetical list. I think it would be easier to parse and rewrite if the list was separated into core/ extra/ community/ aur/ etc.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm not sure that distinction is useful to many users. Though for some packages it is easy to predict which repository they would be located in, for others it is somewhat arbitrary.
Note that foreign packages are already listed as a separate category from native ones.
I think this would be useful in conjunction with an option to pin packages to their repositories, in which case the packages would be specified as e.g. core/linux. Then, lexicographical sorting would take care of grouping the packages by repository. (See also #42 for a discussion on pinning packages to a version.)
By default the packages are in a big long alphabetical list. I think it would be easier to parse and rewrite if the list was separated into core/ extra/ community/ aur/ etc.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: