On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Eduardo Romero k3nsai@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I have updated wicd quite a few times already, since I was using it to test something in my network. I had my few share of bugs opened for wicd, but now, they are all closed, hopefully, closed and dead. But, well, I have no more need for wicd, so, I am officially retiring from maintaining it. Feel free to grab it, or do with the packages what you want. To this point nobody has showed interest in taking it. So, let's hope someone takes it and give it the care it should have.
I honestly have no means to test it to full capacity, so for half the bugs I had to rely on what others told me. I send this email, because I won't like it to be there sitting outdated and uncared for too much.
PS: I just upgraded it for the last time, to version 1.5.6, because it seems to fix some problems.
Thanks,
Eduardo "kensai" Romero
If nobody will take it, I can maintain it on community.
Cheers
Thanks! I use this package.
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Angel Velásquez angvp@archlinux.com.ve wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Eduardo Romero k3nsai@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I have updated wicd quite a few times already, since I was using it to test something in my network. I had my few share of bugs opened for wicd, but now, they are all closed, hopefully, closed and dead. But, well, I have no more need for wicd, so, I am officially retiring from maintaining it. Feel free to grab it, or do with the packages what you want. To this point nobody has showed interest in taking it. So, let's hope someone takes it and give it the care it should have.
I honestly have no means to test it to full capacity, so for half the bugs I had to rely on what others told me. I send this email, because I won't like it to be there sitting outdated and uncared for too much.
PS: I just upgraded it for the last time, to version 1.5.6, because it seems to fix some problems.
Thanks,
Eduardo "kensai" Romero
If nobody will take it, I can maintain it on community.
Cheers
-- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Linux Counter: #359909 Arch Linux Trusted User
The package is actually out of date, I asked for maintain this package in community if it's possible, in fact I built a version from myself, I have the PKGBUILD if someone want to test it.
Cheers
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 02:40:58AM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
The package is actually out of date, I asked for maintain this package in community if it's possible, in fact I built a version from myself, I have the PKGBUILD if someone want to test it.
IMO it should stay in extra. Its the only decent alternative to netcfg if you dont want to use GNOME or KDE. And plus its not that out of date, just a sub-version behind. I got updated normally right after previous release. What started this thread?
Greg
2009/1/3, Grigorios Bouzakis grbzks@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 02:40:58AM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
The package is actually out of date, I asked for maintain this package in community if it's possible, in fact I built a version from myself, I have the PKGBUILD if someone want to test it.
IMO it should stay in extra. Its the only decent alternative to netcfg if you dont want to use GNOME or KDE.
I was wondering if ArchAssistant [1] is another decent alternative...
[http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php/ArchAssistant?content=76760]
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Giovanni Scafora linuxmania@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/3, Grigorios Bouzakis grbzks@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 02:40:58AM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
The package is actually out of date, I asked for maintain this package in community if it's possible, in fact I built a version from myself, I have the PKGBUILD if someone want to test it.
IMO it should stay in extra. Its the only decent alternative to netcfg if you dont want to use GNOME or KDE.
I was wondering if ArchAssistant [1] is another decent alternative...
[http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php/ArchAssistant?content=76760]
According to pkgstats wicd has 13+ % usage , Archassistant only 5%. Not to mention its not even in community... Anyway, i just think that a GUI alternative to netcfg should be available in official repos for people who dont use GNOME or KDE.
Greg
2009/1/3, Grigorios Bouzakis grbzks@gmail.com:
Anyway, i just think that a GUI alternative to netcfg should be available in official repos for people who dont use GNOME or KDE.
I think that a GUI alternative to netcfg is not indispensable.
IMO it should stay in extra. Its the only decent alternative to netcfg if you dont want to use GNOME or KDE.
In my opinion should be in extra too, but if remains in extra and nobody grab it, it will get more out-of-date.
And plus its not that out of date, just a sub-version behind.
Probably that "sub-version behind" have important bugfixes, ok, not out-of-date, but... "not updated" will be correctly for you?.
updated normally right after previous release. What started this thread?
This thread is started by Eduardo 'kensai' who told that WICD is up for grabs, he wrote that in arch-dev-public, and since no-dev seemed interested, I replied in this list, is that a crime?.
And btw, isn't a community an official repo?, because several used apps are in community.
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 11:43:44AM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
This thread is started by Eduardo 'kensai' who told that WICD is up for grabs, he wrote that in arch-dev-public, and since no-dev seemed interested, I replied in this list, is that a crime?.
No, but you replied to a discussion which started about a month ago, to a different mailing list, without including the text you are replying to, which is confusing.
And btw, isn't a community an official repo?, because several used apps are in community.
Noone can answer that with 100% accuracy. What does official mean? Does it mean that during updates of eg. python, the packages get rebuilt along with the ones in core and extra? Then no its not. Does official mean, its enabled in /etc/pacman.conf? Then yes it is.
Greg
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis grbzks@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 11:43:44AM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
This thread is started by Eduardo 'kensai' who told that WICD is up for grabs, he wrote that in arch-dev-public, and since no-dev seemed interested, I replied in this list, is that a crime?.
No, but you replied to a discussion which started about a month ago, to a different mailing list, without including the text you are replying to, which is confusing.
Pal, trust me I didn't replied today, I replied ONE month ago (in other list because I don't have access in arch-dev-public, btw I asked for the access for situations like this... ), and I in fact quote it, see it with your own eyes here:
http://www.nabble.com/Re:--arch-dev-public--WICD,-up-for-grabs-td20865188.ht...
(as you can see too, nobody replied in arch-dev-public and neither in arch-general)
And btw, isn't a community an official repo?, because several used apps are in community.
Noone can answer that with 100% accuracy. What does official mean? Does it mean that during updates of eg. python, the packages get rebuilt along with the ones in core and extra? Then no its not. Does official mean, its enabled in /etc/pacman.conf? Then yes it is.
Well, when python2.6 was released, yes we had to rebuilt stuff, like core or extra, so at least some of "official" community have.
And now that you mention this, I'd like to add that some packages on extra depends of packages in community (see http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2009-January/009692.html ) if community isn't an official repo, those dependencies should be in extra too, even by *hierarchy* (don't know if it's correctly written) these dependencies should be in extra.
But this is not my point, if no-dev want to maintain wicd, I'd like to maintain it in community at least.
Cheers
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 01:04:03PM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis grbzks@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 11:43:44AM +0100, Angel Velásquez wrote:
This thread is started by Eduardo 'kensai' who told that WICD is up for grabs, he wrote that in arch-dev-public, and since no-dev seemed interested, I replied in this list, is that a crime?.
No, but you replied to a discussion which started about a month ago, to a different mailing list, without including the text you are replying to, which is confusing.
Pal, trust me I didn't replied today, I replied ONE month ago (in other list because I don't have access in arch-dev-public, btw I asked for the access for situations like this... ), and I in fact quote it, see it with your own eyes here:
http://www.nabble.com/Re:--arch-dev-public--WICD,-up-for-grabs-td20865188.ht...
(as you can see too, nobody replied in arch-dev-public and neither in arch-general)
Lets not make a big deal out of this. This is mailing list. Please, when you are replying to something include the text you are replying to so people can undestand what you are talking about
And btw, isn't a community an official repo?, because several used apps are in community.
Noone can answer that with 100% accuracy. What does official mean? Does it mean that during updates of eg. python, the packages get rebuilt along with the ones in core and extra? Then no its not. Does official mean, its enabled in /etc/pacman.conf? Then yes it is.
Well, when python2.6 was released, yes we had to rebuilt stuff, like core or extra, so at least some of "official" community have.
OK. Another example. Python involves huge amounts of package rebuilds. The most recent one. libpcap. Brain0 sent mails to rebuild all packages depending on libpcap twice in aur-general. Dec 3: http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2008-December/003046.html Dec 11: http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2008-December/003202.html
You are welcome to check how many bug reports for packages in community are not working today, 1 month later here: http://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageDetails;package=150 under "wird benötigt von". Thats very official indeed...
PS, another hug to Sergej for rebuilding ALL of his packages :)
And now that you mention this, I'd like to add that some packages on extra depends of packages in community (see http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2009-January/009692.html ) if community isn't an official repo, those dependencies should be in extra too, even by *hierarchy* (don't know if it's correctly written) these dependencies should be in extra.
The depends are bugs. As far as makedepends, i guess its a compromise the devs had to make.
But this is not my point, if no-dev want to maintain wicd, I'd like to maintain it in community at least.
Appreciated.
Greg
PS, another hug to Sergej for rebuilding ALL of his packages :)
Correction, turns out Sergej didnt rebuild all his packages. Just some of them were built by other people.
Libpcap rebuild results: approximately 6 packages have been rebuilt, while 5 havent.
Greg
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 02:50:23PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
PS, another hug to Sergej for rebuilding ALL of his packages :)
Correction, turns out Sergej didnt rebuild all his packages. Just some of them were built by other people.
Libpcap rebuild results: approximately 6 packages have been rebuilt, while 5 havent.
I thought this thread was about someone adopting a package, not about attacking packagers, or other nonsense.
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Loui Chang louipc.ist@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 02:50:23PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
PS, another hug to Sergej for rebuilding ALL of his packages :)
Correction, turns out Sergej didnt rebuild all his packages. Just some of them were built by other people.
Libpcap rebuild results: approximately 6 packages have been rebuilt, while 5 havent.
I thought this thread was about someone adopting a package, not about attacking packagers, or other nonsense.
+1
I just pointing the subject about the python rebuilt that we did, as an example that maybe for you community isn't official, but it really is, at least for me and someother people who maintain packages in community. So, until the devs says "community isn't official" will be considered as non-official, and then IMHO if that will happens, then community shouldn't be enabled by default on pacman.
So finally, are the devs talking at least about what to do with wicd?
Cheers.
arch-general@lists.archlinux.org