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 * unionfs patch updated Our unionfs patch in our stock kernel was a bit outdated and has been updated to the newer branch, which should fix any issues that may have cropped up.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