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

[arch-dev-public] Where [erxtra] ends and [community] begins
by Pierre Schmitz 17 Oct '07

17 Oct '07

Hi, after the creation of the [core] repository and the cleanup of old [current] it should be clear which packages should be in [core] and which don't. But the border between [extra] and [community] does not seem to be that sharp. Does [extra] only include the most important and essential packages? Is [community] only a playground and a repo full of alpha releases? Defining [extra] in a clear way should make it easier to cleanup this repo, too. We still have a lot of unmaintained or outdated packages. Pierre -- archlinux.de

8 12

Re: [arch-dev-public] Freshen Arch's Graphical Identity (Logo)
by Paul Mattal 17 Oct '07

17 Oct '07

Jason Chu wrote: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 07:43:40PM -0700, eliott wrote: >> I am all for a competition, but I don't know about community vote. >> >> How about community submissions, and voted on by the Arch devs, and TUs? >> >> I don't want to be represented by a piece of talking poop or anything.. >> though..i might vote for that. >> >> I mean...hey... talking poop. >> >> Did this post of mine even make sense? >> *head scratching* > > I'd like to hear what the community thought, but not necessarily go with > what they choose. If we switch the logo, I think we should consider having a trademark search run on our final design(s) and getting our trademark registered. As we grow, I think we'd like to have some protection against people telling us we can't use our logo. - P

2 1

[arch-dev-public] Freshen Arch's Graphical Identity (Logo)
by Travis Willard 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

Hey all! A few threads have started up in the last little while on the forums with "new" logo concepts for Arch - having read them, the most recent[1] made me start thinking that maybe we should put some thought into updating the logo and making it look a bit more professional. I personally would like to see a bit of an update there, something a bit snappier than our current logo[2] which, to me, is looking a bit dated and unprofessional. Suggestions have been made to allow the community to participate, in both the creation of logos for the purpose of being the "new official front-page Arch logo" and also for voting which of the submissions should be used. I like the idea of a community-designed logo, and the activity in the thread linked below would indicate that the community is also pretty enthused at the thought, but we could always just do a Dev-vote to decide which of the submissions we'd prefer if we didn't want to make it a community vote. In any case, I think this is worth investing time in, and I'm prepared to spearhead any initiative on this front. What I'm looking for now is your opinions - do you agree or disagree that maybe it's time to give the logo a sprucing-up? Any comments from the dev team? What's your opinion, Aaron, o benevolant overlord who is currently away on a great trip of sorts but will shortly return? Looking forward to your responses. :) [1] http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=38051 [2] http://bbs.archlinux.org/img/header.png -- Travis

10 25

[arch-dev-public] Perl policy [was: Status Report 2007-10-15]
by Aaron Griffin 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

On 10/15/07, Jeff 'codemac' Mickey <jeff(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > * On Monday, October 15 2007, Aaron Griffin wrote: > > >* Perl policy > > > >This week I am going to coordinate with François (Firmicus) and anyone > >else interested in our perl packages and clean up what we have. > > You should _really_ talk to xterminus/charles about this. He's quite the > perl man as well, and I think you know that. Though I haven't seen him > around in a while, I can send you his IM info so you can ping him. Let me know if you can get a hold of him. According to Francois, he has been unable to get ahold of Charles in a few months.

1 0

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] udev/klibc-udev
by Tobias Powalowski 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

Hi i put new udev/klibc-udev for both arches to testing, please signoff greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa(a)archlinux.org

2 1

[arch-dev-public] Status Report 2007-10-08
by Aaron Griffin 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

Time for another one! Sorry if this one is later than the rest - I've been a tad busy today. ---------- ArchLinux Status Report, 2007-10-01 == Newsworthy Items == * Testing Policy In order to provide a working system to all users, we are going to ensure that all packages in [core] always go through testing first. The core repo is critical enough to where if anything breaks, it is a big deal. Far different than if we broke gnumeric. Core packages should go to testing, and at least one other developer should "sign off" when they've tested it. For simplicity, if you want to skip the [testing] step for non "base" group packages, and provide a direct link to a package for others to sign off, that is fine - as long as 2 developers are accountable for the working state of that package. This shortcut should not be taken for packages in the base group. == Completed Tasks == * Move all Arch related projects to gerolde Looks like we're only missing one project, which we should be able to get to today, so I'm going to say this is "done". Thanks a lot guys. http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/7789 * AUR 1.4.0 Release Special thanks to everyone involved (eliott, tardo, louipc, xilon, thralas, and more). * Bugfix ISO Release With the release of the 2007.08-2 ISOs, we have a functional installer again. Our previous ISOs broke when we moved to the [core] repo. Special thanks to tpowa for all his hard work, and to all the testers who made it possible. * Devtools updates This was an item from last time that Dan and I completed. We have not yet released a new devtools tarball, as I'd like to wait for the chroot build tools to be complete. Ref: http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-September/001883.html == Pending Tasks, Short Term == * db and heimdal out of [testing] The rebuilds have been in testing for some time, and I haven't seen any issues. If there are no show stoppers, we should be able to move these out this week. Could someone confirm this is the case? * Package and Orphan Cleanup Our list has grown, so thanks for all who've adjusted things here. https://www.archlinux.org/wiki/Repo%20Cleanup/ I'm not a fan of these "all orphans in XYZ" items though. Umbrella clauses such as this usually don't work too well - I'd prefer full definitions. Could someone fill those items in appropriately? * DVD and Additional Package ISO Lists We still have yet to fully define the packages we'd like to distribute on additional ISOs. Here I have created a stub https://www.archlinux.org/wiki/ISO-Packages/ Please use this to _explicitly_ list things you want or don't want on these additional ISOs. * Unified chroot build tools I have two automated tools slated for commit to devtools soon. I have a few fixes still to push up there (such as auto-generating a locale, using sudo, etc), but in general, they are in a working state. http://code.phraktured.net/?p=devtools.git;a=summary * Perl policy This item was previously listed as "Use vendor_perl for pacman perl packages", but I'm expanding it. This policy here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Perl_Policy Was written by some perl pros, cross referenced with the Debian perl policy, and I think I agree with most of it. So I want to officially implement this. If you care about perl, lets discuss this. I, however, am going to begin with the following bug reports: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8082 http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8236 http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/7530 http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/7587 == Pending Tasks, Long Term == * Pacman 3.1 Release http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8109 We're creeping slowly in this direction. Special thanks to Chantry Xavier for actually submitting patches, heh. * DB Script Rewrite This one went by the wayside. It appears we're sitting in one of those "not broke" modes. I'd still love to actually do this, but I'm moving it to the "long term" items, as it's not all that critical, ans there are better things to do. * Official pacbuild usage Jason sent out a status thread last week with where http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-October/001944.html * 'Continuous Integration' setup / machine The state hasn't changed much since last time. This is still more of a pipe-dream. Dan pointed out the fact that git actually ships with CI tools ("cidaemon" and "post-recieve-cidaemon") that we could take advantage of. * Modernize our Dashboard Eliott and Simo have been helping me out here. I'm going to give us all a nice document on setting up a local instance for the arch web interface, so we can develop on our own. In addition, we need to move the git repo to projects.al.org but we currently have passwords in there that need to be sanitized. * Architecture Independent Repos Added to flyspray: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8153 It appears that we can implement noarch packages with very little changes. This combines, in a way with the Pacman 3.1 release, and db script rewrites above. * ArchCon 2009: Big Baaad Idea Any ideas for a venue? I wonder, if we had a little donation drive to help the developers all get together, would that be cheating? http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-September/001614.html == Bugs and Issues == I didn't notice anything critical this time around - could someone fill in the blanks here, I didn't have time to scrape major issues together. ---------- Thanks everyone, for your continued hard work. In the upcoming weeks, I have a few grand plans I want to implement, but I'm waiting for a bit of a lull in these important items here. Stay tuned! -- Aaron

6 11

[arch-dev-public] Status Report 2007-10-15
by Aaron Griffin 16 Oct '07

16 Oct '07

ArchLinux Status Report, 2007-10-15 Yeah, OK. This one is a little lacking. I was gone most of the week (Wed - Sun) so much of this is hearsay. Sorry for the long delay in getting this out, I had a lot of information to parse. Let me know if I report anything falsely, or I forgot a major milestone. == Newsworthy Items == * Losing some kernels It looks like, due to external issues, and maintainer workloads, we're going to be losing two of our additional kernels - ck and suspend2. This leaves us with one official kernel in the repos. Ref: http://archlinux.org/news/354/ http://archlinux.org/news/355/ == Completed Tasks == * Successful testing policy implementation Looks like all the core updates have been using the sign-off policy, which is great. For filtering purposes, try to use the [signoff] tag. Thanks to everyone doing this. It also helps the rest of use know what's going on in [core]. * texinfo moved to core/devel While this is minor in the grand scheme of things, it's worth a mention here. * unionfs patch updated Our unionfs patch in our stock kernel was a bit outdated and has been updated to the newer branch, which should fix any issues that may have cropped up. * The "Big Move" from testing This weekend db, heimdal, gtk, gnome, gcc and probably others were moved from testing to core/extra. Special thanks to Andy, Jan, and everyone else involved in making this happen. == Pending Tasks, Short Term == * New logo The concept of creating a new logo for Arch has been brought up often enough. I'd like to see this happen. New repo, new leader, new... well, lots of stuff. It's only fitting that we modify the logo slightly. This ML thread has a few references: http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-October/002158.html The plan, it seems, is to open things up for submissions, then have the developers and TUs vote on the best logo. Before this week is up, I'd like to decide on a submission range and how we want to handle voting. * The dividing line: extra and community Now that we cleaned up the blurry line between current and extra with the core repo, we come across another case of this. Ref: http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-October/002188.html The line between extra and community is not all that clear, so we need to flesh it out. Is it defined by developer time? Is it defined by necessity? Popularity? How should we best clarify this? * Package and Orphan Cleanup Eric did some amazing work here fleshing out our lists in the dev wiki for this. https://www.archlinux.org/wiki/Repo%20Cleanup/ I would like to set aside some time this week to actually clean these up, but we don't need anything fully organized - if anyone has the time, perhaps we could do this Thursday night (my time, heh)? * DVD and Additional Package ISO Lists I generated a stub page last report, but had no time to fill in data. https://www.archlinux.org/wiki/ISO-Packages/ Please use this to _explicitly_ list things you want or don't want on these additional ISOs. When I get the time, I will fill in based on my thoughts. * Unified chroot build tools These are still sitting in my personal branch. I was on vacation last week, so nothing got done. http://code.phraktured.net/?p=devtools.git;a=summary * Perl policy I'd like to move to official implementation of this policy listed here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Perl_Policy This week I am going to coordinate with François (Firmicus) and anyone else interested in our perl packages and clean up what we have. See the following bug reports: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8082 http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8236 http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/7530 http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/7587 == Pending Tasks, Long Term == * Pacman 3.1 Release http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8109 Again, I was away most of last week, so little got completed. I want to meet up with Dan again this week so we can crack out some of these bugs. * DB Script Rewrite This one went by the wayside. It appears we're sitting in one of those "not broke" modes. I'd still love to actually do this, but I'm moving it to the "long term" items, as it's not all that critical, and there are better things to do. * Official pacbuild usage Still looking at this report from Jason. http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-October/001944.html We have an official git repo for pacbuild sitting here: http://projects.archlinux.org/git/?p=pacbuild.git;a=summary This is pretty important. I'd like to move us away from this separation by architecture that we have right now - it shouldn't matter which architecture a given developer runs when it comes to building packages. * 'Continuous Integration' setup / machine The state hasn't changed much since last time, however, Dan pointed out that git actually includes hooks for a CI setup, which is a decent point in git's favor. * Modernize our Dashboard I should be able to pump out some documentation on how to setup a local instance of our site soon. I'd like to coordinate with Eliott and Simo about getting a public (sanitized) git repo up on the projects site so we can begin developing more readily. * Architecture Independent Repos Added to flyspray: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8153 It appears that we can implement noarch packages with very little changes. This combines, in a way with the Pacman 3.1 release, and db script rewrites above. * ArchCon 2009: Big Baaad Idea Last time I brought up the idea of a donation drive with regards to sending the developers to a given venue. No one responded to it, so I'm not sure if it was good or bad. I wonder... were I not in the position I'm in, would I donate? What about you guys? http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2007-September/001614.html

3 2

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] gcc{,-libs}
by Andreas Radke 15 Oct '07

15 Oct '07

available for both archs in testing * please sign off before the big move! Andy

3 2

[arch-dev-public] Absence - sort of
by Thomas Bächler 15 Oct '07

15 Oct '07

Real life has hit me hard this week: My girlfriend got a job not too far away and we found a bigger flat pretty quickly. There is MUCH work ahead of us until we can move and we both have to work starting next week. That means there will be no time at all for arch for at least two weeks, at most four weeks. I will try to follow the mailing lists as good as I can, but won't be active. Have fun guys, I will report back when things change. Thomas

3 2

[arch-dev-public] please don't run db scripts/move is in progress
by Andreas Radke 15 Oct '07

15 Oct '07

^^^ Andy

4 4