- Arch-dev-public - lists.archlinux.org

Re: [arch-dev-public] [tur-users] Mailing list name change/modifications
by Paul Mattal 24 Oct '07

24 Oct '07

eliott wrote: > I think it would be a good idea to make a few mailing list changes, in > particular for the aur community. > > Preconditions (What we have right now): > > tur-users -- end user aur user discussions, tu discussions, etc. > arch-projects -- aur development, and other random stuff. > > Problem: > > The arch-projects list is a bit low use, and seems random. Probably > too much of a catchall to be useful. > > The tur-users mailing list has a name that, to me, doesn't properly > coincide with the mailing list. If a more relevant name is needed than > aur-general, then please suggest it. Lets not get *too* bikesheddy > though. > > Proposal: > > 1. Rename tur-users list to aur-general, for tu chat, and end user > discussions. Same as current tur-users, just with a more relevant > name. > 2. Remove arch-projects mailing list. Too general. Only used for aur > development talk. > 3. Create an aur-dev mailing list, for aur backend coding/development. I like this proposal. How about just aur instead of aur-general? It doesn't really matter, though. - P

1 0

[arch-dev-public] archboot in the git tree
by Aaron Griffin 24 Oct '07

24 Oct '07

Hey all, Quick note. Dan got archboot converted from CVS and I moved it up to git... I think there are one or two mime-type issues, as some of the .sh files are read oddly by firefox, but it's not a huge deal. Right now tpowa is the owner and only one with access. Feel free to request access if you want to work on this. Thanks, Aaron

2 3

Re: [arch-dev-public] status of csup
by Roman Kyrylych 24 Oct '07

24 Oct '07

2007/10/23, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin(a)gmail.com>: > On 10/23/07, Paul Mattal <paul(a)mattal.com> wrote: > > Dan McGee wrote: > > > On 10/23/07, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Right now sudo is in Extra. > > >> I request to move it to Core/base-devel because it is needed by > > >> makepkg to be used by user (which is the right way). > > > > > > Seems reasonable to me, +1 as long as it doesn't pull in other deps > > > and has maintainer(s). > > > > I will continue to maintain sudo in whatever location y'all deem > > fit. At the moment, it sounds like [core] but maybe not base-devel. > > > > It only depends on pam and glibc. > > I vote it moves to core. Whether in base or base-devel is not a huge > deal to me, though it fits better in base. > Hm, csup is like another candidate for base-devel - required by abs. abs can also work with cvsup but we're going to dump it anyway because it's non-portable. It's only 49,6K, dependencies are gcc, zlib and openssl (all in Core). gcc dependency should be changed to gcc-libs, of course. What do you think? -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

3 2

[arch-dev-public] 2007.11-0.2 TEST ISO, 1 week signoff
by Tobias Powalowski 24 Oct '07

24 Oct '07

Hi i just placed the new "Core Dump" TEST ISO to the mirrors: ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/rc-iso/2007.11/ 1 week testing should be enough, I tested them in kvm-qemu and didn't find an issue. last change readded sk98lin network module, it seems still needed for some nics. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

1 0

[arch-dev-public] discussions to death, rules - no innovations?
by Andreas Radke 23 Oct '07

23 Oct '07

In the last few weeks I've seen so many threads about rules and votings we want to give ourself(e.g repo destinctions and repo dividing lines, pkg signoff, iso naming, package movements, license issues, cvs move,...). Wasn't it the big advantage to trust the ArchLinux developers that made it fast growing and bleading edge with an acceptable level of instability? I still like to decide myself what and when to move packages into the repos or when to remove them. Now I have to ask and wait for other devs to signoff packages even for minor bugfixes. And that for two architectures. Didn't we elect Mr. T to become the release manager to let him decide what to do? Now with all the discussions to death and often no actions following - see orphans and cleanup - I loose some of the Arch feeling. All these coming rules seem to slow us down more and more without finding new skilled manpower. I'm sure we all only want the best for ArchLinux but is that the right way? Some rules are always ok. But I have the feeling we are on the way to become somewhat of an overcontrolled and superduper planned Debian. Don't you feel the same? Andy

5 6

[arch-dev-public] SCM branch plans [was: Killing CVS]
by Aaron Griffin 23 Oct '07

23 Oct '07

On 10/23/07, Andreas Radke <a.radke(a)arcor.de> wrote: > Please make sure we will have an easy way to add more "branches" (so i > would call them in svn) from trunk. Right now we have the various repos > for two architectures. But a few devs have (serious?) plans or better > certain ideas to add more branches in the future. Right now our > infrastructure and manpower is the limit that prevents playing with > more stuff. I'm a little curious about what plans you speak of. I've never heard of of these plans like this, and it'd be nice to share thoughts and ideas here.

3 10

[arch-dev-public] 2007.11-0.1 TEST ISO, 1 week signoff
by Tobias Powalowski 23 Oct '07

23 Oct '07

Hi i just placed the new "Core Dump" TEST ISO to the mirrors: ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/rc-iso/2007.11/ 1 week testing should be enough, I tested them in kvm-qemu and didn't find an issue. Announcement draft, if you think the ISOs are working and don't have showstoppers: --- Announcement draft begin Hi Arch community, Arch Linux 2007.11-1, "Core Dump" has been released. This is the second release to use our new repo layout. There are two ISOs, ftp and core. Changelog: GENERAL: - kernel 2.6.23.1 usage - RAM usage has been revisited, these are the new recommendations: * FTP ISO, CORE ISO: arch boot image 160 MB RAM x86_64/i686 (all packages selected) * CORE ISO: lowmem boot image 96 MB RAM x86_64 (all packages selected) 85 MB RAM i686 (all packages selected) 64 MB RAM i686 (only base packages selected) FIXES: - fixed intel wireless automatic module loading (arch boot image) - fixed auto prepare of harddisk (lowmem boot image) As usual check md5sum before using the images and also be aware of the new RAM recommendations the images have. Have fun greetings tpowa --- Announcement draft end im away now for 4-6 weeks due to exams. greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

6 10

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] filesystem 2007.11
by Tobias Powalowski 23 Oct '07

23 Oct '07

Hi filesystem 2007.11, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

3 2

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] initscripts 2007.11-2
by Tobias Powalowski 23 Oct '07

23 Oct '07

Hi initscripts 2007.11-2, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

4 3

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] perl -8
by Tobias Powalowski 23 Oct '07

23 Oct '07

Hi fixed site-perl error messages during first installation, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

4 3