January 2014 - Aur-dev - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-dev] [PATCH] Forbid developers to vote
by Balló György 11 Jan '14

11 Jan '14

According to Trusted User Bylaws, TUs (and only TUs) must take part in votes. Developers who want to take part in votes should set their account type to 'Trusted User'. --- web/html/tu.php | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/web/html/tu.php b/web/html/tu.php index a6aa292..5d4e37d 100644 --- a/web/html/tu.php +++ b/web/html/tu.php @@ -39,6 +39,9 @@ if ($atype == "Trusted User" || $atype == "Developer") { if ($isrunning == 0) { $canvote = 0; $errorvote = __("Voting is closed for this proposal."); + } else if ($atype == "Developer") { + $canvote = 0; + $errorvote = __("Only Trusted Users are allowed to vote."); } else if ($row['User'] == username_from_sid($_COOKIE["AURSID"])) { $canvote = 0; $errorvote = __("You cannot vote in an proposal about you."); -- 1.8.5.2

2 1

[aur-dev] [PATCH] Go to package when selecting a typeahead suggestion
by Lukas Fleischer 11 Jan '14

11 Jan '14

From: Joris Steyn <jorissteyn(a)gmail.com> Directly jump to the package details when selecting an entry from the drop-down list. Implements FS#34471. Signed-off-by: Lukas Fleischer <archlinux(a)cryptocrack.de> --- web/html/home.php | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/web/html/home.php b/web/html/home.php index ddbb0fd..e80efaa 100644 --- a/web/html/home.php +++ b/web/html/home.php @@ -118,7 +118,11 @@ $(document).ready(function() { matcher: function(item) { return true; }, sorter: function(items) { return items; }, menu: '<ul class="pkgsearch-typeahead"></ul>', - items: 20 + items: 20, + updater: function(item) { + document.location = '/packages/' + item; + return item; + } }).attr('autocomplete', 'off'); }); </script> -- 1.8.5.2

3 4

[aur-dev] Git repos for AUR packages
by Lukas Fleischer 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

Hi, I think the idea of integrating Git with the AUR [1] is a very good one and should be a milestone for the 3.0.0 release. The idea is to create a Git repository per package. Pros: * Full history of each AUR package, even if the maintainer changes. * Lays the foundations for supporting multiple maintainers per package. * Makes it easier to contribute patches (see git-format-patch(1), branches and pull requests). * cgit might do quite a lot of the work required on the front-end side. PKGBUILD previews, history view, tarball generation, Git clone support, ... * Updating packages will be easier (`git pull` followed by `makepkg -i` instead of doing all the work from the web browser or via an AUR helper). Cons: * Needs more space on the AUR server. Currently, an AUR package uses ~17KiB on the official Arch Linux AUR server. This will probably increase by a factor of 10. Shouldn't be too problematic unless we get a lot of new packages or a lot of updates. * More load on the AUR server. Especially if we no longer store tarballs but use cgit to generate them on the fly (needs to be discussed). Migration should be easy since we can use a small shell script to convert all packages into Git repositories. The first idea is to slightly change the package submission process to extract the whole tarball, parse the PKGBUILD and do a Git commit with the tarball content. There will be an additional text field to enter a (part of the) commit message that is used. As mentioned above, all package repositories will be accessible via cgit. The PKGBUILD preview (and maybe also the tarball download) will be replaced with a simple link to cgit. Later, we should think of how to support support for git-push(1). The main issues are * Authentication: Virtual accounts, somehow connected to the AUR DB? * Integration of the PKGBUILD/.AURINFO parser: Git hook? * DoS protection: Quotas, ... Any comments and suggestions are welcome! Regards, Lukas [1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/23010

6 10

[aur-dev] [RFC] Per-user package submission and management
by Techlive Zheng 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

As I suggested in a previous mail, the package evolution would be much more community driven if AUR allows user to submit its own varient of an "official" AUR package with the URL like [2], while the "official" AUR package stays at [1]. [1]: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xyz [2]: http://aur.archlinux.org/account/john/packages/xyz Git Integration --------------- This functionality is similar to a Git fork on platforms like Github, but it is doable without Git. We can have this first, then consider the integration with Git. As I explained previously in another mail, it is really bad to support 'git push' for "offcial" AUR packages, (`git-push` for user's package varient is accetable, but it should have a lower priority), so the integration with Git is just simply to setup a read-only public Git interface for each package. Detailed Explaination --------------------- Each varient of the "official" AUR package should have its own votes. On the "official" AUR package page, these varients as well as their votes should be listed, and sorted by the votes, so that user will have an alternative to try if the "official" one fails to build. The difference for a varient than the "official" one should be explained on the varient's page. The style of a user's package varient page should have obviously difference to the "offcial" AUR package page, or a notification message should be shown at the top to say something like "This package is not support by AUR community, use with caution!". With per-user package submission, we will have the follwing benefits: * Easy patch submission and maintainership management * If an "official" AUR package is unmaintained for a while and the maintainer is no longer active, someone who is willing to take over the maintainership could submit its modifciation of the PKGBUILD as his package first, then ask the AUR-GENERAL list for a review of his PKGBUILD to ensure it is following the Arch's PKGBUILD standards, and then TUs can assign him as the new maintainer to the "official" AUR package. This maintainership means the "official" AUR package will use his source tarball since then. His personal package varient still exists but will be hidden from the list on the "official" AUR package page. (The technical detail depends on how this is implemented, it could be a symlink to the maintainer's package directory on the filesystem level, or a pure duplication of the maintainer's package sources, or just an internal redirection to the maintainer's package varient for the offcial package URL.) * If the maintainer of an "offcial" AUR package is active, and someone feels the "official" AUR package could be improved, he could submit his modified PKGBUILD as his package first, then send the maintainer a Patch Request, the maintainer could then do a review to see if it is worth adopting. We could implement a friendly web interface for this patch review process. If the maintainer accepts the patch, he could apply the patch on the web interface or do it manually. If the maintainer declines the patch, then the user could still maintain it as a package varient if he wants, or ask the AUR-GENERAL list for a disscution. Of course, deletion permission for a user's package varient should be granted to the user itself, he does not need to ask AUR-GENERAL list for a deletion. If consider the integration with Git, this should be implemented similar to a Git Pull Request but simpler. For AUR, I do not think we need something as complicated as Pull Request. Pull Request in a platform like Github usually means a non-fastward merge with full change history on both merge sides. We do not need detailed change history, a new commit with final changes that makes our "official" AUR package better is enought, so, "Patch Request" might be proper. * Better package outdate flagging mechanism With per-user package submission, we could implement a better outdate flagging mechanism. When someone flags a package outdated, he needs to provide the newest `pkgver` number. With this `pkgver` number, all varients of this package will be checked and flagged if outdated. On the "official" AUR package's page, only these updated package varients will be shown, others will be marked in red and hided (needs a clik to show). * Package deletion and merging handling Package deletion and merging is only for "official" AUR packages. User can keep and maintain what ever package varient he wants as his own. * If an "official" AUR package is deleted by TUs for some reasons (proprietary software, un-standard naming convention, or being merged into other package, etc), the entry for this package (basically the name) should be kept in the database, as well as the reason why it is deleted, so that when a user visits the page or attempts to create it again, he will know why this package is not supported by the AUR community. If he insists it is resonable to create such a package, he could request it in AUR-GENERAL list for TUs attention, or he can just maintain it as its own package, but no AUR "official" version exists. For package varients whose "official" version is deleted, a notable notification should be alarmed at the top of varient's page, so that the user will know this package is not supported by the community, thus has no "official" version exists, and why, and what alternatives are recommended to choose. * If a never-existent package was created, then the "official" package will be automatically created, and the maintainer is assigned to the one who uploaded this package in the first palce. With per-user package submission, we could unify all the PKGBUILDs to AUR, easy to search, easy to review, absolutely community-oriented evolution for packages. (Currently, people store PKGBUILDs in all kinds of places, Github, Pastebin, and no integration with AUR.) Possible Cons ------------- * Lots of package varients Yes, but it is easier to keep the "official" one alive and updated, and let the user's package varient die naturally, it does not matter. For packages no one is willing to maintain, we can just remove the maintainer and mark the "official" AUR package inactive and disable the download. The PKGBUILD still can be found in the users' package varient, just the AUR doesn't have a "official" one due to lacking of a maintainer, until someone step in and take the responsiblity to maintain it. We can deal with thousands of outdated, unmaintained packages in AUR this way, nothing loss, nothing hurt. * More complicated AUR structure Is it? I think it should be easy to people who use Linux, especially Arch Linux, right? End Notes --------- This is some of my thoughts about how improves the AUR, comments and discussions are highly welcome. After all, I just to help making the Arch Linux better and better.

1 1

[aur-dev] [PATCH 1/2] passreset.php: Refactor HTML
by Lukas Fleischer 08 Jan '14

08 Jan '14

* Use the "errorlist" class for errors. * Refactor some code. * Properly display error messages when requesting a key. Signed-off-by: Lukas Fleischer <archlinux(a)cryptocrack.de> --- web/html/passreset.php | 25 ++++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/web/html/passreset.php b/web/html/passreset.php index 94a1ad9..59fd4bc 100644 --- a/web/html/passreset.php +++ b/web/html/passreset.php @@ -56,16 +56,14 @@ html_header(__("Password Reset")); <div class="box"> <h2><?= __("Password Reset"); ?></h2> + <?php if ($step == 'confirm'): ?> + <p>Check your e-mail for the confirmation link.</p> + <?php elseif ($step == 'complete'): ?> + <p>Your password has been reset successfully.</p> + <?php elseif (isset($_GET['resetkey'])): ?> <?php if ($error): ?> - <p><span class="error"><?= $error ?></span></p> - <?php endif;?> - <?php - if ($step == 'confirm') { - echo __('Check your e-mail for the confirmation link.'); - } elseif ($step == 'complete') { - echo __('Your password has been reset successfully.'); - } elseif (isset($_GET['resetkey'])) { - ?> + <ul class="errorlist"><li><?= $error ?></li></ul> + <?php endif; ?> <form action="" method="post"> <table> <tr> @@ -84,18 +82,19 @@ html_header(__("Password Reset")); <br /> <input type="submit" class="button" value="<?= __('Continue') ?>" /> </form> - <?php - } else { - ?> + <?php else: ?> <p><?= __('If you have forgotten the e-mail address you used to register, please send a message to the %saur-general%s mailing list.', '<a href="https://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general">', '</a>'); ?></p> + <?php if ($error): ?> + <ul class="errorlist"><li><?= $error ?></li></ul> + <?php endif; ?> <form action="" method="post"> <p><?= __("Enter your e-mail address:"); ?> <input type="text" name="email" size="30" maxlength="64" /></p> <input type="submit" class="button" value="<?= __('Continue') ?>" /> </form> - <?php } ?> + <?php endif; ?> </div> <?php -- 1.8.5.2

1 1

[aur-dev] AUR generation next?
by Karol Blazewicz 07 Jan '14

07 Jan '14

Some people think that AUR in the current state is an unmaintainable mess, with many outdated packages, PKGBUILDs that haven't been updated in a looong while https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=175171 Some users suggest transforming AUR into a wiki, some would like to use git for pull requests etc., others support an annual wipe i.e. AUR is moved into a read-only state (and moved to aur-old address) and maintainers are asked to resubmit PKGBUILDs - this would keep old comments and votes and over time only the PKGBUILDs that actually are maintained would be kept in the AUR. What are the thoughts of the AUR overlords about all this? If you give such grassroots effort a NACK, there's no point in the discussion, until further notice.

3 2

[aur-dev] Remove package search auto-complete
by Callan 06 Jan '14

06 Jan '14

Hi, Before I start off on my rant I just want to say I am not trying to attack whoever committed this feature originally. Please don't take it personally. Can you please please please apply this patch to remove the auto-complete popup on the front page quick search. This is such an obnoxious use of javascript and I honestly see no point in it. I understand the intention fine but, in practice, I find myself having to hit enter 3 times just to do a search. Every. Single. Time. I've wasted more time pressing enter now than I ever did using my eyes to manually filter the result list on the next page. What's worse is as far as I can tell this is literally the only time javascript is used in the AUR and we are pulling in two entire libraries for it. What's the deal?? This cuts even deeper for me because I spent months trying to convince people in the past that, shock and horror, the web uses javascript these days and we can take advantage of it. Now it's allowed in and it's not even being used properly. If anyone disagrees with me, please say why, because I'd love to have a debate on the merits of this feature. Otherwise, can we get this applied as soon as possible. Thanks -- Callan

5 7

Re: [aur-dev] [PATCH] Go to package when selecting a typeahead suggestion
by Connor Behan 03 Jan '14

03 Jan '14

On 01/01/14 03:52 PM, Lukas Fleisher wrote: > Directly jump to the package details when selecting an entry from the > drop-down list. > > Implements FS#34471. > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Fleischer <archlinux(a)cryptocrack.de> > --- > web/html/home.php | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/web/html/home.php b/web/html/home.php > index ddbb0fd..e80efaa 100644 > --- a/web/html/home.php > +++ b/web/html/home.php > @@ -118,7 +118,11 @@ $(document).ready(function() { > matcher: function(item) { return true; }, > sorter: function(items) { return items; }, > menu: '<ul class="pkgsearch-typeahead"></ul>', > - items: 20 > + items: 20, > + updater: function(item) { > + document.location = '/packages/' + item; > + return item; > + } > }).attr('autocomplete', 'off'); > }); > </script> > -- 1.8.5.2 Would this apply to the package search on archlinux.org as well as aur.archlinux.org? The main argument for disabling suggestions altogether is that a native text entry (from an HTML input tag) spawns a non-native suggestion widget. I know this cannot be helped until search suggestions become a web standard, but people still might think it looks tacky.

1 0