[2016-12-24 20:18:21 +0100] Jelle van der Waa:

I'd like to see some improvements in the maintenance of pyalpm.

I'm not sure what improvements you have in mind but there's two things called pyalpm: Remy's personal git repo (projects:users/remy/pyalpm.git) and our package. I'm assuming you're thinking of the repo.

Why not fork it? If a fork is demonstrably better it would surely convince Remy to merge the changes back into his personal repo. Or if Remy is unavailable we could even decide to use the fork as upstream for our pyalpm package.

Cheers.

On 2016-12-24 20:18, Jelle van der Waa wrote:

I'd like to see some improvements in the maintenance of pyalpm. The last update of pyalpm added pacman 5 compatibility support although several improvements patches where posted from October 2015 till 2016. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].

I would love to see a more active maintenace of pyalpm, since it's vital for the arch-security tracker and namcap. I've mailed Remy about these patches but so far haven't gotten any response.

[1] https://git.archlinux.org/users/remy/pyalpm.git/ [2] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2016-October/004413.html [3] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2016-October/004424.html [4] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2016-October/004420.html [5] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/2015-October/004309.html ~

Let's move it to top level (to "Arch Linux Projects") as opposed to Remy's project and give you push access. I don't see any reason not to. Let's wait +/- 3 days and I will proceed with this.

Bartłomiej