How does this compare to https://archlinuxarm.org/? I'm surprised to not see a reference to this prior art in the article.
Arch linux aarch64 port is not a fork, it uses the same upstream PKGBUILD which contains minimal aarch64 specific conditional compilation and config
I think even this project was not being mentioned so maybe they are not aware of each other
Lazy me would often update pacman database and upgrade just a few packages. Living dangerously but often times it doesn't really matter
If reproducible build is important maybe consider NixOS?
I was under the impression that that's what ALARM was. And that seems supported by https://github.com/archlinuxarm/PKGBUILDs/blob/master/core/R... (and the small number of packages in that repo). Was I mistaken?
But to answer your question:
A lot of ALARM core repositories are out of date, their extra repositories are even worse. chromium has been broken for like 1.5 year or so (I think it's fixed recently). Can't really blame them, they need to support older armv7 hardwares. Their packages are also for armv7 instead of the aarch64 architectures used by a lot of tablets/PC nowadays, so there's a huge performance/compatibility tradeoff they're making.
Arch linux aarch64 port is as the name says, aarch64 only, the people don't really care for older RPi. And because their work lives on the official arch linux repo, the pkgbuilds by definition won't be out of date. However package building are still community maintained, and will be out of date in that regards.
I'm using this one for my desktop and it's very smooth for a passive cooling thing.