December 2010 - Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

Re: [aur-general] removal proposal for Ranguvar
by Linux Lover 05 Dec '10

05 Dec '10

2010/12/4 <aur-general-request(a)archlinux.org> > > > Message: 8 > Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 17:07:54 -0500 > From: Loui Chang <louipc.ist(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [aur-general] removal proposal for Ranguvar > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> > Message-ID: <20101204220754.GC32145(a)celine.lan> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > On Sat 04 Dec 2010 23:59 +0200, Ionu? B?ru wrote: > > On 12/04/2010 11:53 PM, Ray Rashif wrote: > > >On 5 December 2010 05:46, Loui Chang<louipc.ist(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>On Sat 04 Dec 2010 22:19 +0200, Ionu? B?ru wrote: > > >>>On 12/03/2010 12:06 AM, Ionu? B?ru wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>I'm waiting to see your replies and then act based on them. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>>i don't see this being discuss any further and all messages have been > only > > >>>in one direction. > > >>> > > >>>i modified his account on aur to normal user. Ranguvar, i'm sorry for > this > > >>>and when you'll have time again you should consider applying again. > > >>> > > >>>Loui can you disable his account on sigurd? > > >>>Andrea can you remove his privileges from bugtracker and forum? > > >> > > >>You still need to create a voting proposal. > > >>Why doesn't anyone read the damned bylaws? > > > > > >I myself thought there would be voting, but I just realised Ionut > > >inferred that we needn't vote from the following: > > > > > >"for which standard voting procedure deviates from the above." > > > > > > > above being the voting procedure and from my understanding what is the > > opposite of having a voting? NO voting. > > > > > > we had this situation in the past and we didn't had any voting procedure. > we > > just removed it and we continued our business. > > > > with or without the vote, the result would be the same. And to be fair, > we > > are investing too much time in the removal, even more that he invested in > > community. > > Then don't waste any time on it. Leave it alone. > But if you do want to remove a Trusted User you MUST follow the bylaws. > Three days discussion and Five days of voting for removal due to > inactivity. Read the bloody bylaws. > > We cannot be at liberty to remove people without proper procedure. > Forgive me for speaking out of term here, but wouldn't it just be easier to amend the bylaws to get away of that ambiguity? Two people reading it, two different conclusions, sounds like a lawyer could make big money out of this ;-).

3 2

[aur-general] removal proposal for Ranguvar take 2
by Ionuț Bîru 05 Dec '10

05 Dec '10

hi, because of my lack of understanding of bylaws and failing to comply with them on my first proposal, i like to take the chance and redo the proposal, following letter by letter the removing procedure. Conform bylaws a motion procedure should be sent on aur-general with reasons. Here are my reasons: 1) i noticed in January he doesn't have an account on our devel panel, i asked him to send all the infos to get one and he replied that he doesn't need one because none of his packages are suitable for community. Replying to his email i encourage to get one and adopt some packages from community. At that time we have ~700 orphans and i haven't got any replies from him. 2) no commits in community since the addition. 3) he's not marked as inactive and conform bylaws this deviates from the "above", above being, 5 days discussion period + 7 voting. Because of that i'm starting a 3 days discussion period and 5 days voting. Please discuss the motion(really discuss and not like in previous,couples of hours and the next days arguing about bylaws) Ranguvar can defend himself. -- Ionuț

8 7

[aur-general] DELREQ for several gtk2/gnome/glib perl packages
by Justin Davis 05 Dec '10

05 Dec '10

I sent a delete request awhile ago but I haven't heard a response. In case it didn't send properly here it is again. These perl packages are already provided in the [extra] repository and due to naming confusion were uploaded to the AUR. I adopted these as the aurperl user when they were orphans. I noticed them last week when updating one. Here are the links, package names, and corresponding [extra] package. http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25815 perl-gnome2 [gnome-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25816 perl-gnome2-canvas [gnomecanvas-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25817 perl-gnome2-vfs [gnome-vfs-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25818 perl-gnome2-gconf [gconf-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25813 perl-gtk2 [gtk2-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25822 perl-gtk2-gladexml [glade-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25814 perl-pango [pango-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25812 perl-glib [glib-perl] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25810 perl-cairo [cairo-perl] Please delete these packages since they are duplicates. Thanks! -- -Justin

2 1

[aur-general] Quorum?
by Kaiting Chen 05 Dec '10

05 Dec '10

I just noticed that a number of votes for the addition of a Trusted User in the past (including my own) did not ever reach the requisite sixty-six percent quorum. I really have no idea what to do about this. --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/

2 2

[aur-general] deletion request: geogebra_dl
by solsTiCe d'Hiver 04 Dec '10

04 Dec '10

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=23281 seems to be an old version of geogebra. it is orphaned. latest package is geogebra (3.2.45.0) or even geogebra-beta. so this one, geogebra_dl stucked at 3.0.0 could be deleted.

2 1

[aur-general] deletion request: arista-bzr
by solsTiCe d'Hiver 04 Dec '10

04 Dec '10

hi. >From what I understand arista is on a git server. so arista-bzr is outdated. and could be removed. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25876 There is currently an arista-devel package but it should be better renamed arista-git. what's the way to go ? arista-devel is acceptable as a name even though it comes from a git ?

2 1

[aur-general] Remove request
by jesse jaara 04 Dec '10

04 Dec '10

Please remove: openoffice.org-voikko http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29139 A new pkg called voikko-openoffice was created to that the name would be similar to voikko-libreoffice suomi-malaga http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29138 A new pkg called suomi-malaga-voikko was created because it is possible to build several different versions of suomi-malaga from the source one for voikko spell checker and a version for sukija. Sukija isn't in aur yet but I will make a pkgbuild for it soon. So the version it will use will be suomi-malaga-sukija. Depencys of other pkgs have been taken care of and wikipage if one exist will be updated shortly or if one doesn't exist I might create one. -- (\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile (0.o ) to help him achieve world domination. (> <) come join the dark side. /_|_\ (we have cookies.)

2 1

[aur-general] Orphan request
by jesse jaara 04 Dec '10

04 Dec '10

Following packages have been out-of-date for a some time now suomi-malaga libvoikko enchant-voikko mozvoikko openoffice.org-voikko http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29725 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=9525 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30563 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29139 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29138 I have posted a up-to-date PKGBUILDs for some of them too and maled the maintainer a week ago but didn't get a reply. -- (\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile (0.o ) to help him achieve world domination. (> <) come join the dark side. /_|_\ (we have cookies.)

2 1

[aur-general] Moving subtle to [community]
by Ángel Velásquez 03 Dec '10

03 Dec '10

Hi, I'd like to move subtle [1] to [community], as you see have 48 votes atm (including mine) and I think in [community] many people will give it a try. Opinions? [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=13016 -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com

3 2

[aur-general] Removal request
by jesse jaara 03 Dec '10

03 Dec '10

Please remove libtuxcap-cvs http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=27469 as it is replaced whit libtuxcap-git -- (\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile (0.o ) to help him achieve world domination. (> <) come join the dark side. /_|_\ (we have cookies.)

2 1