Hi Loui, On Monday 20 September 2010 at 02:23 Loui Chang wrote:
Hi Peter. Thanks for sending in these patches. I really don't know when I'll be able to give these a fair look however.
No problem - so sorry for sending more :-) I've actually spent today taking another look at how this can be accomplished, and since it seems that we should require users to give reasons for deletion requests, which then get forwarded to aur-general (otherwise the automated emails aren't too useful), I've reimplemented some of it in a slightly different way. Basically I put the bulk of it in pkgedit.php rather than pkgfuncs.inc, imitating the way category changes happen. This means that in my implementation: - Users are now required to give a reason when requesting deletion, from a list. Hopefully this will make people think / check. - When a package has a pending deletion request, this is displayed on the package page. - Users can leave a comment (and should in most cases), which gets forwarded to the list in the deletion proposal and can start any discussion. - The maintainer and everyone on the notify list also gets an email, letting them know that the package is up for deletion (with the reasons) and this will be discussed on aur-general. - TUs and devs can cancel deletion requests (preferably following discussion on the list), ordinary users can't. - On the downside, bulk deletion proposals aren't possible, since reasons have to be given per package on the pkgedit.php page. Bulk cancelations are possible though, in case of abuse. - It should be fairly easy to add and amend valid reasons for proposing deletion, since these are just extra variables in the http post, which get sent to the mailing list. They're not stored in the database (seemed overkill to me). (Five related) patches to follow shortly (and don't bother with the previous ones I sent, these include that stuff).
The AUR really needs someone to step up to keep it going now.
Well, once I'm a bit more comfortable with the code and processes and stuff, I'd be happy to help. Cheers, Pete. PS. There's a bit of duplication of code here, but if the general idea is accepted, then I'll work on factoring some of it out later.