On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:

On 29 January 2011 01:20, David C. Rankin wrote:

...

Guys,

As I work through building the pkgbuilds for Trinity on Arch, I have been keeping notes, etc. on what has to take place. I will put that information up on a wiki. My question to the Arch devs is "do you want it here on the Arch wiki, or do you want it over on the Trinity wiki?"

It doesn't matter to me. It makes more sense to have it here, but there has been so much rancor over 'kde3 is dead' that I don't want to go to the effort here if somebody is just going to nix it.

For the interested, Trinity is no longer kde3. It is currently actively developed, and is moving to cmake and qt4. There are current builds for Debian, Ubuntu and Slackware being maintained. My goal is to create a set of pkgbuilds for Arch (which will obviously take a bit of time). But if I can get them working from the svn tree, it should be a great resource for Arch.

So what say the powers that be? Do the wiki page here or at Trinity?

The wiki is for Arch-related documentation, so why not?

Yes! wiki it up!

On 01/28/2011 11:30 PM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

> So what say the powers that be? Do the wiki page here or at Trinity?

The wiki is for Arch-related documentation, so why not?

Yes! wiki it up! kde3 is only dead as long as noone maintains it. That's how Arch works, after all. So yes, I think putting Trinity on the wiki is fine, and it should/will only get nixed if it stops getting maintained.

Thanks Peter, Ray, Thomas and Ng, I'll get the framework done this weekend. It is a double bonus doing it here, Trinity uses FosWiki and it is miserable compared to mediawiki :) -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

On 01/29/2011 12:09 AM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:

2011/1/28 David C. Rankin

...

On 01/28/2011 11:30 PM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:

...

...

...

...

>>> So what say the powers that be? Do the wiki page here or at > Trinity? > > The wiki is for Arch-related documentation, so why not? >

Yes! wiki it up! kde3 is only dead as long as noone maintains it. That's how Arch works, after all. So yes, I think putting Trinity on the wiki is fine, and it should/will only get nixed if it stops getting maintained.

Thanks Peter, Ray, Thomas and Ng,

I'll get the framework done this weekend. It is a double bonus doing it here, Trinity uses FosWiki and it is miserable compared to mediawiki :)

-- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

Thanks David, I am excited to see it!

-Thomas S Hatch

Guys, I have gotten the outline for the Trinity page completed and have made good headway getting the contents up. I still have information to add, but my fingers wore out. I get the remaining info up in the next day or so. The page is: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trinity I still need to know what to do with the PKGBUILDs I have so far. I don't know if I should upload them as part of the wiki, or just provide links to them on another site. I'll create the links once I know where you guys want me to put them. I can just leave them on my server (it's no size or bandwidth issue) If you have thoughts or ideas for solving some of the problems mentioned in the wiki, let me know. I'm shallow on experience with PKGBUILDs, but learning fast. That's it for now. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

If it's a number of PKGBUILDs, place them for eg. in google code under a project name eg. "arch-trinity". This allows a one-stop location to check out everything. You can of course use an aur uploader to mass upload them. Or you can do both. On 30 January 2011 15:58, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 1:00 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:

...

On 01/29/2011 12:09 AM, Thomas S Hatch wrote:

...

2011/1/28 David C. Rankin

...

On 01/28/2011 11:30 PM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote:

...

...

>>>>>        So what say the powers that be? Do the wiki page here or at >>> Trinity? >>> >>> The wiki is for Arch-related documentation, so why not? >>> > > Yes! wiki it up! kde3 is only dead as long as noone maintains it. That's how Arch works, after all. So yes, I think putting Trinity on the wiki is fine, and it should/will only get nixed if it stops getting maintained.

Thanks Peter, Ray, Thomas and Ng,

       I'll get the framework done this weekend. It is a double bonus doing it here, Trinity uses FosWiki and it is miserable compared to mediawiki :)

-- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

Thanks David, I am excited to see it!

-Thomas S Hatch

Guys,

 I have gotten the outline for the Trinity page completed and have made good headway getting the contents up. I still have information to add, but my fingers wore out. I get the remaining info up in the next day or so. The page is:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trinity

 I still need to know what to do with the PKGBUILDs I have so far. I don't know if I should upload them as part of the wiki, or just provide links to them on another site. I'll create the links once I know where you guys want me to put them. I can just leave them on my server (it's no size or bandwidth issue)

 If you have thoughts or ideas for solving some of the problems mentioned in the wiki, let me know. I'm shallow on experience with PKGBUILDs, but learning fast. That's it for now.

The best place for any PKGBUILD is really in the AUR and maybe under a seperate source control, but that's not really required.

I still need to know what to do with the PKGBUILDs I have so far. I don't know if I should upload them as part of the wiki, or just provide links to them on another site. I'll create the links once I know where you guys want me to put them. I can just leave them on my server (it's no size or bandwidth issue)

If you have thoughts or ideas for solving some of the problems mentioned in the wiki, let me know. I'm shallow on experience with PKGBUILDs, but learning fast. That's it for now.

I would highly suggest github. It's an amazing tool to share developement! It's a lot easier for testers to not only provide feedback but to also contributing back. https://github.com/