- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Need a password reset for AUR login.
by Derek Taylor 09 Nov '20

09 Nov '20

I have forgotten my password for login to the AUR page. On the page, it says "If you have forgotten the user name and the primary e-mail address you used to register, please send a message to the aur-general mailing list." My user name should be dwt1. But when I click on "forgot password" I never receive any email for a reset (I waited more than a day).

2 2

[aur-general] TU application - bastelfreak
by Tim Meusel 09 Nov '20

09 Nov '20

Hi! I'm Tim Meusel and I want to spent more time in the Arch Linux community and increase the package quality. I first got in touch with open source some years ago in the Puppet Community [0] where I started to love Puppet and FOSS. At the moment I'm employed at a big ISP where I maintain a few thousand systems. My solution of choice for configuration management is Puppet because it fulfills all requirements and is easy to extend. For a few projects I require up2date systems with modern software, that's why i choose Arch Linux. Since Puppet was already present in the company, the Arch Linux boxes were puppetized as well. I wrote or contributed to multiple packages related to Puppet on Arch Linux. foxxx0 and shibumi were so kind to continue maintaining them in the official repositories: * puppet [1] * puppet5 [2] * facter [3] * libwhereami [4] * ruby-deep_merge [5] * ruby-httpclient [6] * ruby-sync [7] * ruby-puppet-resource_api [8] * ruby-semantic_puppet [9] Besides working on open source projects, I spent a huge amount of time for my second passion, cooking and doing BBQ. From time to time I also attend ice hockey events as visitor but also as hobby-referee or player. As a trusted user I would like to co-maintain those packages, enable tests on the PKGBUILDs where tests are currently missing (for example ruby-puppet-resource_api, ruby-semantic_puppet and Puppet), fix the remaining namcap warnings (for example on facter and libwhereami) and also import some other Puppet related tools into the official repository. Some of them are already in the AUR (not all maintained by myself): * fluent-bit (not Puppet related) [10] * ruby-gettext-setup [11] * ruby-minitar [12] * ruby-puppet_forge [13] * ruby-rr [14] * ruby-cri [15] * ruby-test-unit-rr [16] * ruby-fast_gettext [17] * ruby-gettext [18] * ruby-locale [19] * ruby-text [20] * ruby-colored2 [21] * r10k [22] If you check my AUR packages, you might notice the awful ruby-log4r package. That's a dead project where the source code is gone. It's a dependency for r10k. I'm "maintaining" ruby-log4r in the AUR, so I can test and build r10k, but I'm also in contact with the upstream developers to replace this dead dependency. I've no intention to get log4r into any official repository. I talked to shibumi and hashworks in the past days, both reviewed the packages and agreed to sponsor my application. I'm available on Freenode as bastelfreak. I'm pretty active in #archlinux.de and #voxpupuli. My GPG key fingerprint is C10B6298A584A5632E254DA304D659E6BF1C4CC0 best regards, Tim [0] https://voxpupuli.org [1] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [2] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [3] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [4] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [5] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [6] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [7] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [8] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [9] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=pack… [10] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/fluent-bit#comment-749760 [11] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-gettext-setup/#comment-725838 [12] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-minitar/#comment-723296 [13] https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=ruby-puppet_forge [14] https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=ruby-rr [15] https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=ruby-cri [16] https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=ruby-test-unit-rr [17] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-fast_gettext/#comment-723301 [18] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-gettext/#comment-725388 [19] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-locale/#comment-723294 [20] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-text [21] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-colored2/#comment-771053 [22] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/r10k/#comment-770978

8 16

[aur-general] Fwd: [PRQ#21898] Orphan Request for sge Rejected
by Manhong Dai 24 Oct '20

24 Oct '20

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> Date: Sat, Oct 24, 2020, 2:28 PM Subject: Re: [PRQ#21898] Orphan Request for sge Rejected To: <noreply(a)aur.archlinux.org> Cc: <aur-requests(a)archlinux.org>, <i(a)jingbei.li> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020, 7:33 AM Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 6:02 AM <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> wrote: > >> Request #21898 has been rejected by Foxboron [1]: >> >> Not interested. The sge package is not going to point at your fork. >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Foxboron/ > > > Thanks a lot for the reply! But I never ask the current maintainer to > point to my fork. I guess those markdown syntax messed it up. > > This package is in clear text-book copyright violation right now! The > current maintainer is using my original SGE source code patch file without > mentioning I am the patch's author and University of Michigan's copyright. > Further, he split it into many patch files, now those modifications look to > be his contribution as nobody will dig into git history, not to mention > patching with many files is the worst way to promote a software. > > I believe I am the first one in the world who made SGE work under the > latest SSL and GLIBC. I created the single source code patch file, and > initially put it on AUR sge. > > I also tried to settle with the current maintainer, I proposed that he can > keep the package but he has to use my single patch file with the copyright > and author on the top, then remove my name from the PKGBUILD file. He > rejected me. > > Now here are all the facts, could you please reconsider it again? > > 1, I am the original author of the SGE source code patch file, I put my > source code patch file on AUR sge. > 2. I didn't receive any email notification before the package was taken > over, This is confirmed by a TU > 3, I didn't join AUR-general before the package was taken over, and the > same TU confirmed that this is not required. > 4, I tried to settle with the current maintainer, and asked him to respect > Copyright and original author, he rejected me. > 5, The current maintainer's PKGBUILD doesn't work, and he 'git push' three > times anyway, while knowing it fails. It took him 7 days to fix a 'cd' > error. > > Everything above are true facts, and it can be verified in court, and I am > willing to take any penalty if they are not fact. > > Now, the simple question is, can any original work put on AUR be taken > away like this? > > Best, > Manhong > > Request #22028 has been rejected by Foxboron [1]: Patches has been removed. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Foxboron/ Thanks! @Foxboron. it is all good as long as my original work is not involved now. As programmers, I always respect and acknowledge other people's work and expect the same from others. Truly appreciate those who helped me, including a few users who forwarded me the emails on this list. Or I probably will never know such an email list exists. So sorry I cannot mention your names as I just got 1000+ mail list subscription confirmation in one day. I also want to say sorry to those who feel these are spams. The thing is this kind of issues will happen from time to time as AUR doesn't associate a project with user name. I hope a little waste of your time will set a good AUR standard from now on. This is a good lesson for me too, as I will put copyright/license on all my work, no matter it is MIT, GPL or BSD, and should have published my work originally on github. SGE will be continued on my github project as I will make it more Linux friendly and totally ditch some unnecessary features, such as Windows support, whenever I find nothing better to do. As I added cmake compiling support recently, followup development will be much easier. Have a good day! Feel free to send me email directly at daimh(a)umich.edu. Best, Manhong PS, If someone wants to subscribe me on another 1000+ email lists again, please find some truly interesting ones. My hobbies are hunting, fishing and racing. Thanks in advance! Sorry I just found I sent to a wrong list... again.... Hopefully this is the last email I sent to aur-general.

1 0

[aur-general] Sge delete request
by Manhong Dai 24 Oct '20

24 Oct '20

Request #22025 has been rejected by Foxboron [1]: PKGBUILDs are standard enough to not constitute original work. Please stop abusing the AUR. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Foxboron/ I am not talking about the PKGBUILD. I even asked the current maintainer to remove my name from the contributor in that file. The copyright violation is my SGE source code patch file. That is my original work. Best, Manhong Sent from phone

1 0

[aur-general] SGE has copyright violation
by Manhong Dai 24 Oct '20

24 Oct '20

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 6:02 AM <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> wrote: > Request #21898 has been rejected by Foxboron [1]: > > Not interested. The sge package is not going to point at your fork. > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Foxboron/ Thanks a lot for the reply! But I never ask the current maintainer to point to my fork. I guess those markdown syntax messed it up. This package is in clear text-book copyright violation right now! The current maintainer is using my original SGE source code patch file without mentioning I am the patch's author and University of Michigan's copyright. Further, he split it into many patch files, now those modifications look to be his contribution as nobody will dig into git history, not to mention patching with many files is the worst way to promote a software. I believe I am the first one in the world who made SGE work under the latest SSL and GLIBC. I created the single source code patch file, and initially put it on AUR sge. I also tried to settle with the current maintainer, I proposed that he can keep the package but he has to use my single patch file with the copyright and author on the top, then remove my name from the PKGBUILD file. He rejected me. Now here are all the facts, could you please reconsider it again? 1, I am the original author of the SGE source code patch file, I put my source code patch file on AUR sge. 2. I didn't receive any email notification before the package was taken over, This is confirmed by a TU 3, I didn't join AUR-general before the package was taken over, and the same TU confirmed that this is not required. 4, I tried to settle with the current maintainer, and asked him to respect Copyright and original author, he rejected me. 5, The current maintainer's PKGBUILD doesn't work, and he 'git push' three times anyway, while knowing it fails. It took him 7 days to fix a 'cd' error. Everything above are true facts, and it can be verified in court, and I am willing to take any penalty if they are not fact. Now, the simple question is, can any original work put on AUR be taken away like this? Best, Manhong

2 2

Re: [aur-general] SGE Orphaning
by Amin Vakil 20 Oct '20

20 Oct '20

I remember you have said that you use this package on your servers in university, so why don't you just create a new package with any modifications you need in PKGBUILD and even make it specified for your needs if you want to and use it for yourself? What are you trying to accomplish with being called "maintainer" of sge package? You can post your PKGBUILD on github/gitlab or any other git service online to track the modifications, being able to download it from anywhere, ask for other people's opinion, etc.

2 3

[aur-general] Away for a bit due to covid related limitations
by Andrzej Giniewicz 19 Oct '20

19 Oct '20

Hi all, I have to declare away time, for the first time since I've started TU duties. Unfortunately I'm stuck with my work computer for now (Windows only) and my Arch dev box is at another physical address - which I have limited access due to the epidemic situation in Poland right now. I've seen few out of date notifications for my community packages, but I cannot update them right now, so if someone could update them in my place for now it would be great. I hope to be back to maintaining my packages soon. I cannot sign this message either unfortunately. Cheers and stay healthy everybody, Andrzej Giniewicz (https://www.archlinux.org/people/trusted-users/#aginiewicz)

1 0

[aur-general] SGE Orphaning
by Manhong Dai 19 Oct '20

19 Oct '20

Dear Trust User, I submitted an Orphaning request in both comment area and ticket system. Feel free to let me know if there is anything I need to do to follow up. My email address is daimh(a)umich.edu , just in case I missed any emails. Best, Manhong

3 4

Re: [aur-general] aur-general Digest, Vol 192, Issue 5
by michael＠eowyn.net 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

> Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 10:47:51 -0400 > From: Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> > To: aur-general(a)archlinux.org > Subject: Re: [aur-general] aur-general Digest, Vol 192, Issue 4 > Message-ID: <2972ceb5928384111909983ea92ddc4f6322b616.camel(a)umich.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Hi Alexis, > > Thanks a lot for the contructive feedback! > > I didn't receive your email actually! I found your reply in > the digest. > > It might be our UMich.edu Gmail or AUR-general email server > right now. But this sge drama was not caused by the email issue. It is > caused by that I have an account in AUR, but didn't register the AUR- > general, and I didn't even know it exists until a few days ago. > > I agree that "It seems that in the last times you didn't take > enough care of the sge package". The thing is My PKGBUILD just works > without any glitch on dozens of SGE nodes since day one. It includes > those C code modification I did in the past decade to make it work with > CentOS, Debian and the latest GCC/SSL in current Arch Linux. Further, I > don't have much free time to maintain a PKGBUILD file or read the AUR > wiki, just like many other AUR package maintainers. > > Thanks a lot for the suggestion though, I will host my C code > modification with some upcoming accumulated improvement on github, as > github won't make me lose the package in a period of just two months > ending with two 19-minute apart email notifications. > > Here is my suggestions to AUR though. > > 1, It seems that many PKGBUILD issues can be solved by a script. For > example, the PKGVER mistake that the current maintainer of SGE package > made and user a821 commented "The pkgver used to be 20200527 but now is > 8.1.9. However 20200527 > 8.1.9 so epoch=1 might be > required."?https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sge/ > > Although I won't believe one who 'couldn't even get something as simple > as the pkgver right' cannot make a good AUR package because 'good' is > very subjective and definitely not limited to a PKGBUILD file, AUR > should have a script running from time to time to check such simple > mistakes and notify the maintainer. I actually believe that you already > have such thing because some comments on my other AUR packages are very > professional and like robot :). Or a command to check some common > mistakes in a PKGBUILD file? > > > 2, Force an AUR package maintainer to join AUR-general, or send every > notification to the package maintainer, as I never received any email > notification about orphaning SGE. > > Thanks your very much for your constructive feedback again! > > Best, > Manhong > > On Tue, 2020-10-13 at 12:00 +0000, aur-general-request(a)archlinux.org > wrote: >> Send aur-general mailing list submissions to >> ????????aur-general(a)archlinux.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> ????????https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/aur-general >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> ????????aur-general-request(a)archlinux.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> ????????aur-general-owner(a)archlinux.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of aur-general digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> ?? 1. Re: Reply to your request SGE (Manhong Dai) >> ?? 2. Re: Reply to your request SGE (Doug Newgard) >> ?? 3. Re: Reply to your request SGE (Alexis BRENON) >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:57:52 -0400 >> From: Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> >> To: Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> >> Cc: Manhong Dai via aur-general <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> >> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Reply to your request SGE >> Message-ID: >> ????????<CAAwO+oOcWq0OXvhuAaoayHqfAa7v5egUi3HjA50_xLGKV8gt1A(a)mail.gmail.com >> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" >> >> You are right that I don't know what 'out of state' or 'out of date' >> or >> 'out of whatever' is. All I know is that I suddenly lost the >> ownership and >> will have to change my cluster maintenance code tomorrow..... >> >> In terms of pkgver or pkgbuild.? Now you said nobody cares about >> pigver, >> guess who said this sentence below? >> 'You couldn't even get something as simple as the pkgver right' >> >> ? It turned out I can read and actually remember.... >> >> >> Best, >> Manhong >> Sent from phone >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 10:46 PM Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> >> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:38:02 -0400 >> > Manhong Dai via aur-general <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> wrote: >> > >> > > I actually did read your email. You said I cannot get a simple >> > > thing such >> > > as pkgver right. >> > > >> > > Let me explain to you, from your point of view, you certainly >> > > want to >> > have >> > > some rule or guideline to make all the package? has the same >> > > standard. >> > That >> > > is understandable and it is what make Arch Linux popular. I would >> > > love to >> > > be compliant with the rule whenever I have the resource, and I >> > > did with >> > all >> > > other my AUR packages. >> > > >> > > From my point of view, a pkgver is not the point here. I do need >> > > to make >> > my >> > > modified SGE package can be compiled with the latest SSL, GCC, >> > > other >> > Linux >> > > contribution, and can be used to upgrade an old node without >> > > losing >> > > configuration. No matter how bad a pkgver is defined, an Arch >> > > Linux with >> > a >> > > working SGE is away better, right? >> > > >> > > The problem is actually not on my side. Your request system has >> > > my email >> > > address, I sent you a request after the package was adopted, some >> > > bystanders figured? out I didn't get any reply and sent your >> > > reply to me, >> > > That is when I knew that the request is also in the mail list, >> > > and such >> > > email list exists...... >> > > >> > > Because you are attacking my capability, and I believe everybody >> > > who can >> > > read will know your claim is actually baseless, I did ignore your >> > personal >> > > attack in my previous email. >> > > >> > > Yes, I can say sorry about ignoring hat. >> > > >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > Manhong >> > > Sent from phone >> > > >> > >> > So you read it and you're STILL top posting in violation of the >> > rules. And >> > making up something called "out of state" which doesn't exist. And >> > claiming >> > that you have to be on a mailing list when it's been explained, >> > multiple >> > times, >> > that you don't. You claim you're reading, now try understanding. >> > >> > Nobody cares what your point of view is on pkgver. It's obvious to >> > pretty >> > much >> > anyone that's ever written, or even read, a PKGBUILD. >> > >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:02:24 -0500 >> From: Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> >> To: aur-general(a)archlinux.org >> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Reply to your request SGE >> Message-ID: <20201012220224.44a4878b@Scimmia> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> >> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:57:52 -0400 >> Manhong Dai via aur-general <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> wrote: >> >> > You are right that I don't know what 'out of state' or 'out of >> > date' or >> > 'out of whatever' is. All I know is that I suddenly lost the >> > ownership and >> > will have to change my cluster maintenance code tomorrow..... >> > >> > In terms of pkgver or pkgbuild.? Now you said nobody cares about >> > pigver, >> > guess who said this sentence below? >> > 'You couldn't even get something as simple as the pkgver right' >> > >> > ? It turned out I can read and actually remember.... >> >> Then try reading again, as that's not what I said at all. You either >> have a >> serious issue with reading comprehension or you're just making things >> up now. >> >> And you're STILL violating the rules of just about every mailing list >> out >> there, even after being told twice. >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:02:08 +0200 >> From: Alexis BRENON <brenon.alexis+arch(a)gmail.com> >> To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" >> ????????<aur-general(a)archlinux.org> >> Cc: Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> >> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Reply to your request SGE >> Message-ID: >> ????????<CAJPB9o2UNiGi0ox3t-faNbXeme9ekNo+C0rtDJexL-9RZyfsUg(a)mail.gmail.com >> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" >> >> > Then try reading again, as that's not what I said at all. You >> > either have a >> > serious issue with reading comprehension or you're just making >> > things up now. >> > >> > And you're STILL violating the rules of just about every mailing >> > list out >> > there, even after being told twice. >> >> Just to try to calm down the conversation. >> >> Manhong, you say that this is your package, however, AUR is not the >> right place to host "your own" package, it is a place to host the >> community's packages. >> Actually, there is a dedicated maintainer who takes care of a >> package, >> and it seems that in the last times you didn't take enough care of >> the >> sge package (there is a set of rules to follow that make you a good >> care-taker: >> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_package_guidelines) >> so you aren't the maintainer anymore. This seems fair. >> >> You complain about not being notified before you lost the >> maintainership. The maintainer always receives e-mail notifications >> to >> its personal e-mail address. You are the only one who does not >> receive >> it, maybe there is a problem on your side... >> >> In any case, there are some rules. They have been followed. And >> nobody >> can give you back the maintainership. You can ask to become a >> co-maintainer which sounds good, you do not have to bear all the >> burden alone! >> >> If you want to host "your own" package, following your own rules for >> the PKGBUILD format, and don't bothering with the community's rules, >> feel free to host your own AUR service on your cluster. >> >> Kind regards, >> Alexis >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aur-general mailing list >> aur-general(a)archlinux.org >> https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/aur-general >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of aur-general Digest, Vol 192, Issue 4 >> ******************************************* > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:58:35 +0400 > From: Archange <archange(a)archlinux.org> > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> > Cc: Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> > Subject: Re: [aur-general] aur-general Digest, Vol 192, Issue 4 > Message-ID: <6eb8705a-b0e0-ce6c-d678-af930082ceb2(a)archlinux.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Hi, > > Le 14/10/2020 ? 18:47, Manhong Dai via aur-general a ?crit?: >> 2, Force an AUR package maintainer to join AUR-general, or send every >> notification to the package maintainer, as I never received any email >> notification about orphaning SGE. > > I?m not commenting on everything else here, but regarding this point: > subscription to aur-general is not required, and every notifications > are > sent to the package maintainer? or at least should be, because a bug > introduced some months ago broke that (see > https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/aurweb/-/merge_requests/6) > > So indeed you did not receive the Orphaning requests notifications. But > you did receive comments on the AUR page, and you did receive the > emails > to which you responded and that told you to *stop top-posting*. > > Regards, > Bruno/Archange > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 11:16:54 -0400 > From: Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> > To: Archange <archange(a)archlinux.org>, "Discussion about the Arch User > Repository (AUR)" <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> > Subject: [aur-general] SGE > Message-ID: <259c09da06d5caf05708ae2bb765daf023eaa44b.camel(a)umich.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Hi Bruno, > > Thanks a lot for confirming that I didn't receive Orphaning > email!? > > I did receive the comment. I actually checked the pull request > a little, but decided not to reply because I didn't want to be > negative. I totally believe the current maintainer has a better format > of PKGBUILD (well, except his pkgver mistake). Now let me comment a few > things on SGE. > > In the SGE package comment. > > 1, The current maintainer blamed me "?pkgver???????????????". Google > translation: "It?s really intolerable that even pkgver was filled in > wrong."? > > Now it turned out that the current maintainer made the mistake..... > > 2, He also said "??.install?post install??????????????????", Google > translation "A lot of files that the package manager did not take over > were installed in the post install stage through .install". > > This could be a disaster if somebody want to upgrade SGE by uninstall > and re-install. SGE has been a very special software because it needs > some post installation to let user specify a lot of host/jobs/queue > configuration. Thus all files are put under /opt/sge for the legacy > reason. > > > Best, > Manhong > > > > > On Wed, 2020-10-14 at 18:58 +0400, Archange wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Le 14/10/2020 ? 18:47, Manhong Dai via aur-general a ?crit?: >> > 2, Force an AUR package maintainer to join AUR-general, or send >> > every >> > notification to the package maintainer, as I never received any >> > email >> > notification about orphaning SGE. >> >> I?m not commenting on everything else here, but regarding this point: >> subscription to aur-general is not required, and every notifications >> are >> sent to the package maintainer? or at least should be, because a bug >> introduced some months ago broke that (see >> https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/aurweb/-/merge_requests/6) >> >> So indeed you did not receive the Orphaning requests notifications. >> But >> you did receive comments on the AUR page, and you did receive the >> emails >> to which you responded and that told you to *stop top-posting*. >> >> Regards, >> Bruno/Archange > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 13:19:05 -0400 > From: Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> > To: Sauyon Lee <s(a)uyon.co>, "Discussion about the Arch User Repository > (AUR)" <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> > Subject: Re: [aur-general] SGE > Message-ID: <b337ab689ecdb27cd16c01ad51c39626f1519058.camel(a)umich.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain > > Hi Sauyon, > > Thank you! I learned! > > Best, > Manhong > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:03:26 +0200 > From: alad <alad(a)archlinux.org> > To: aur-general(a)archlinux.org > Subject: Re: [aur-general] SGE > Message-ID: <683dd11c-f5f1-f0a6-8f97-acde1c8e82b3(a)archlinux.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 14/10/2020 17:16, Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote: >> Hi Bruno, > > Top-posting, do you know what it means? > > Do not do this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Top-posting > > But do this: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style or > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting > > Again https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Code_of_conduct#Top_posting > > Don't expect anyone to take you seriously if you keep doing this even > after being asked not to, repeatedly. > > Alad > >> >> Thanks a lot for confirming that I didn't receive Orphaning >> email! >> >> I did receive the comment. I actually checked the pull request >> a little, but decided not to reply because I didn't want to be >> negative. I totally believe the current maintainer has a better format >> of PKGBUILD (well, except his pkgver mistake). Now let me comment a >> few >> things on SGE. >> >> In the SGE package comment. >> >> 1, The current maintainer blamed me "?pkgver???????????????". Google >> translation: "It?s really intolerable that even pkgver was filled in >> wrong." >> >> Now it turned out that the current maintainer made the mistake..... >> >> 2, He also said "??.install?post install??????????????????", Google >> translation "A lot of files that the package manager did not take over >> were installed in the post install stage through .install". >> >> This could be a disaster if somebody want to upgrade SGE by >> uninstall >> and re-install. SGE has been a very special software because it needs >> some post installation to let user specify a lot of host/jobs/queue >> configuration. Thus all files are put under /opt/sge for the legacy >> reason. >> >> >> Best, >> Manhong >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 2020-10-14 at 18:58 +0400, Archange wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Le 14/10/2020 ? 18:47, Manhong Dai via aur-general a ?crit?: >>>> 2, Force an AUR package maintainer to join AUR-general, or send >>>> every >>>> notification to the package maintainer, as I never received any >>>> email >>>> notification about orphaning SGE. >>> I?m not commenting on everything else here, but regarding this point: >>> subscription to aur-general is not required, and every notifications >>> are >>> sent to the package maintainer? or at least should be, because a bug >>> introduced some months ago broke that (see >>> https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/aurweb/-/merge_requests/6) >>> >>> So indeed you did not receive the Orphaning requests notifications. >>> But >>> you did receive comments on the AUR page, and you did receive the >>> emails >>> to which you responded and that told you to *stop top-posting*. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Bruno/Archange > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > aur-general mailing list > aur-general(a)archlinux.org > https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/aur-general > > > ------------------------------ > > End of aur-general Digest, Vol 192, Issue 5 > ******************************************* > It seems that many PKGBUILD issues can be solved by a script. This sounds a lot like namcap.

1 0

Re: [aur-general] aur-general Digest, Vol 192, Issue 4
by Manhong Dai 14 Oct '20

14 Oct '20

Hi Alexis, Thanks a lot for the contructive feedback! I didn't receive your email actually! I found your reply in the digest. It might be our UMich.edu Gmail or AUR-general email server right now. But this sge drama was not caused by the email issue. It is caused by that I have an account in AUR, but didn't register the AUR- general, and I didn't even know it exists until a few days ago. I agree that "It seems that in the last times you didn't take enough care of the sge package". The thing is My PKGBUILD just works without any glitch on dozens of SGE nodes since day one. It includes those C code modification I did in the past decade to make it work with CentOS, Debian and the latest GCC/SSL in current Arch Linux. Further, I don't have much free time to maintain a PKGBUILD file or read the AUR wiki, just like many other AUR package maintainers. Thanks a lot for the suggestion though, I will host my C code modification with some upcoming accumulated improvement on github, as github won't make me lose the package in a period of just two months ending with two 19-minute apart email notifications. Here is my suggestions to AUR though. 1, It seems that many PKGBUILD issues can be solved by a script. For example, the PKGVER mistake that the current maintainer of SGE package made and user a821 commented "The pkgver used to be 20200527 but now is 8.1.9. However 20200527 > 8.1.9 so epoch=1 might be required." https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sge/ Although I won't believe one who 'couldn't even get something as simple as the pkgver right' cannot make a good AUR package because 'good' is very subjective and definitely not limited to a PKGBUILD file, AUR should have a script running from time to time to check such simple mistakes and notify the maintainer. I actually believe that you already have such thing because some comments on my other AUR packages are very professional and like robot :). Or a command to check some common mistakes in a PKGBUILD file? 2, Force an AUR package maintainer to join AUR-general, or send every notification to the package maintainer, as I never received any email notification about orphaning SGE. Thanks your very much for your constructive feedback again! Best, Manhong On Tue, 2020-10-13 at 12:00 +0000, aur-general-request(a)archlinux.org wrote: > Send aur-general mailing list submissions to > aur-general(a)archlinux.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/aur-general > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > aur-general-request(a)archlinux.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > aur-general-owner(a)archlinux.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of aur-general digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Reply to your request SGE (Manhong Dai) > 2. Re: Reply to your request SGE (Doug Newgard) > 3. Re: Reply to your request SGE (Alexis BRENON) > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:57:52 -0400 > From: Manhong Dai <daimh(a)umich.edu> > To: Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> > Cc: Manhong Dai via aur-general <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> > Subject: Re: [aur-general] Reply to your request SGE > Message-ID: > <CAAwO+oOcWq0OXvhuAaoayHqfAa7v5egUi3HjA50_xLGKV8gt1A(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > You are right that I don't know what 'out of state' or 'out of date' > or > 'out of whatever' is. All I know is that I suddenly lost the > ownership and > will have to change my cluster maintenance code tomorrow..... > > In terms of pkgver or pkgbuild. Now you said nobody cares about > pigver, > guess who said this sentence below? > 'You couldn't even get something as simple as the pkgver right' > > It turned out I can read and actually remember.... > > > Best, > Manhong > Sent from phone > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 10:46 PM Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> > wrote: > > > On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:38:02 -0400 > > Manhong Dai via aur-general <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > > > > > I actually did read your email. You said I cannot get a simple > > > thing such > > > as pkgver right. > > > > > > Let me explain to you, from your point of view, you certainly > > > want to > > have > > > some rule or guideline to make all the package has the same > > > standard. > > That > > > is understandable and it is what make Arch Linux popular. I would > > > love to > > > be compliant with the rule whenever I have the resource, and I > > > did with > > all > > > other my AUR packages. > > > > > > From my point of view, a pkgver is not the point here. I do need > > > to make > > my > > > modified SGE package can be compiled with the latest SSL, GCC, > > > other > > Linux > > > contribution, and can be used to upgrade an old node without > > > losing > > > configuration. No matter how bad a pkgver is defined, an Arch > > > Linux with > > a > > > working SGE is away better, right? > > > > > > The problem is actually not on my side. Your request system has > > > my email > > > address, I sent you a request after the package was adopted, some > > > bystanders figured out I didn't get any reply and sent your > > > reply to me, > > > That is when I knew that the request is also in the mail list, > > > and such > > > email list exists...... > > > > > > Because you are attacking my capability, and I believe everybody > > > who can > > > read will know your claim is actually baseless, I did ignore your > > personal > > > attack in my previous email. > > > > > > Yes, I can say sorry about ignoring hat. > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > Manhong > > > Sent from phone > > > > > > > So you read it and you're STILL top posting in violation of the > > rules. And > > making up something called "out of state" which doesn't exist. And > > claiming > > that you have to be on a mailing list when it's been explained, > > multiple > > times, > > that you don't. You claim you're reading, now try understanding. > > > > Nobody cares what your point of view is on pkgver. It's obvious to > > pretty > > much > > anyone that's ever written, or even read, a PKGBUILD. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:02:24 -0500 > From: Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> > To: aur-general(a)archlinux.org > Subject: Re: [aur-general] Reply to your request SGE > Message-ID: <20201012220224.44a4878b@Scimmia> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:57:52 -0400 > Manhong Dai via aur-general <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > > > You are right that I don't know what 'out of state' or 'out of > > date' or > > 'out of whatever' is. All I know is that I suddenly lost the > > ownership and > > will have to change my cluster maintenance code tomorrow..... > > > > In terms of pkgver or pkgbuild. Now you said nobody cares about > > pigver, > > guess who said this sentence below? > > 'You couldn't even get something as simple as the pkgver right' > > > > It turned out I can read and actually remember.... > > Then try reading again, as that's not what I said at all. You either > have a > serious issue with reading comprehension or you're just making things > up now. > > And you're STILL violating the rules of just about every mailing list > out > there, even after being told twice. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 10:02:08 +0200 > From: Alexis BRENON <brenon.alexis+arch(a)gmail.com> > To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" > <aur-general(a)archlinux.org> > Cc: Doug Newgard <scimmia(a)archlinux.org> > Subject: Re: [aur-general] Reply to your request SGE > Message-ID: > <CAJPB9o2UNiGi0ox3t-faNbXeme9ekNo+C0rtDJexL-9RZyfsUg(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > > Then try reading again, as that's not what I said at all. You > > either have a > > serious issue with reading comprehension or you're just making > > things up now. > > > > And you're STILL violating the rules of just about every mailing > > list out > > there, even after being told twice. > > Just to try to calm down the conversation. > > Manhong, you say that this is your package, however, AUR is not the > right place to host "your own" package, it is a place to host the > community's packages. > Actually, there is a dedicated maintainer who takes care of a > package, > and it seems that in the last times you didn't take enough care of > the > sge package (there is a set of rules to follow that make you a good > care-taker: > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_package_guidelines) > so you aren't the maintainer anymore. This seems fair. > > You complain about not being notified before you lost the > maintainership. The maintainer always receives e-mail notifications > to > its personal e-mail address. You are the only one who does not > receive > it, maybe there is a problem on your side... > > In any case, there are some rules. They have been followed. And > nobody > can give you back the maintainership. You can ask to become a > co-maintainer which sounds good, you do not have to bear all the > burden alone! > > If you want to host "your own" package, following your own rules for > the PKGBUILD format, and don't bothering with the community's rules, > feel free to host your own AUR service on your cluster. > > Kind regards, > Alexis > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > aur-general mailing list > aur-general(a)archlinux.org > https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/aur-general > > > ------------------------------ > > End of aur-general Digest, Vol 192, Issue 4 > *******************************************

5 6