- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] Merge requests for [bdsm] and [bdsm-git]
by Evan Teitelman 13 Aug '13

13 Aug '13

Please merge bdsm[1] and bdsm-git[2] into sm-git[3]. This project has been renamed. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bdsm/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bdsm-git/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sm-git/

2 1

[aur-general] Merge request for [xhp]
by Evan Teitelman 13 Aug '13

13 Aug '13

Please merge xhp[1] into xhp-git[2]. This package was named incorrectly. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xhp/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xhp-git/

2 1

[aur-general] Merge request for [last.fm]
by Evan Teitelman 12 Aug '13

12 Aug '13

Please merge last.fm[1] into lastfm[2]. Both packages provide the same tool. The last.fm package is unmaintained and its PKGBUILD file is a mess. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/last.fm/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lastfm/

2 1

[aur-general] Please remove cndrvcups-capt and cndrvcups-common
by Karl-Robert Ernst 12 Aug '13

12 Aug '13

Hello TUs, after a discussion with the affected maintainers we decided it would be best to remove cndrvcups-capt and cndrvcups-common in favor of capt-src https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/cndrvcups-capt/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/cndrvcups-common/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/capt-src/ Thanks and best Regards.

2 1

[aur-general] Merge request for photoqt
by Antonio Arias 12 Aug '13

12 Aug '13

Hello TUs, Can someone merge the package 'photo' [1] in 'photoqt' [2] because author has changed the name of program.(photo was too generic) I am the maintainer of 'photoqt'. Thanks and best regards, archtux [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/photo/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/photoqt/

2 1

[aur-general] discussion about activity
by Xyne 12 Aug '13

12 Aug '13

Hi, I want to discuss our notions of "activity". According to the current bylaws, >If a TU becomes inactive without declaring it, "disappears", someone must motion for their removal for reason of unwarranted and undeclared inactivity, and the normal procedure for the motion is followed. The problem is that there is no definition of "active" here. The text may be interpreted to mean that a motion should be made if a TU has any AUR packages flagged out-of-date, which is presumably not the intention. The only metric we currently have for determining inactivity is > active TUs that keep quorum from being established on a voting procedure for three consecutive voting procedures (they need not be on the same motion) are automatically brought up for removal procedure, by reason of unwarranted inactivity. That is also a useless metric, as 3 votes could easily be called simultaneously the same day that a TU was hit by a car. As I see it, these clauses are trying to achieve two different things: 1) provide a way to remove TUs who clearly have no intention of fulfilling their duties 2) ensure that vote results are representative of the group I think there is a better way to achieve that which avoids the ambiguities and other problems of the current text. I propose, **as a starting point for the discussion**, that we remove the aforementioned clauses (and dependent context). To deal with removing inactive users, the following can be added to the end of the "Removal of a TU" section, replacing the current clause of special removals: > An exception to the standard removal procedure is made if a TU has not done > ANY of the following for a period of at least 2 months: > > 1. added, removed or updated a package in +[community]+ or the AUR > > 2. performed any action that required TU privileges on the AUR > > 3. posted a message to aur-general > > In this special case, SVP is followed by a discussion period of three days, > a quorum of 66%, and a voting period of 5 days. The first point is verifiable for all cases except AUR package removal. The second point is verifiable in the case of votes but not for moderation actions such as merges and deletions of other packages. This could possibly be changed in the AUR backend. The third is obviously verifiable. This clause does not preclude the removal of TUs for other reasons and the bylaws currently allow for removal motions at any time. If a TU only posts inconsequential messages to the mailing list once every two months to avoid activating the clause then he or she can still be brought up for removal. The clause is essentially a "housekeeping clause for automatic cleanup of completely inactive TUs. With Lukas' new patch set, the AUR will now have an activity field. I also propose that the meaning of this field be limited strictly to quorum, and thus be completely independent of the definition of activity above. A TU should mark him-/herself as inactive only when he/she will be unable to participate in votes for a period of time. The TU will then be excluded from the quorum calculation (and also prevented from voting, and possibly other activities). Again, there is no need to include a clause in the bylaws for automatic motions if a TU prevents quorum from being reached. The motion can be raised without such a clause. This is natural. If three votes on the same day fail to meet quorum then it is clearly a different case then three votes over the course of 1-2 months. The field should perhaps be made a checkbox named "present" rather than "active". With these changes, other parts of the section of the bylaws entitles "Active vs. Inactive" will need to be changed, as declaring inactivity to aur-general will have no significance.* This avoids problems with truly unforeseeable absences such as connection problems and medical emergencies. Users may still make optional announcements at their own discretion with the usual requests for others to manage their packages for a period of time, if necessary. I have attached a first draft (new.txt) of these proposals along with a patch. Note that this is not a formal proposal. I plan to make one but I hope to get some feedback first. Please read through the attached version and compare it to the current version. The attachments also include the old version, the patch, a brief changelog, and the resulting HTML document for easier reading and comparison to https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html The bylaws Git repo can be found here: https://projects.archlinux.org/tu-bylaws.git/ Note that I have made some stylistic changes that preserve the original meaning. I can separate these from the proposal if necessary. Regards, Xyne * Incidentally, I have always been uncomfortable with the way inactivity announcements are expected to be made on a public mailing list. Inactivity is almost always due to being away from home for a period of a week or more. Announcing that in public is an open invitation to burglars and other griefers who know who the announcer is and where he/she lives.

5 7

[aur-general] Remove maven-3.1.0 package
by Leonidas Spyropoulos 12 Aug '13

12 Aug '13

Please remove the maven-3.1.0 package [1] as the official maven package [2] is now updated to 3.1.0 version. [1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/maven-3.1.0/ [2]: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/any/maven/ Thanks -- Caution: breathing may be hazardous to your health. #include <stdio.h> int main(){printf("%s","\x4c\x65\x6f\x6e\x69\x64\x61\x73");}

3 5

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
by Arch Website Notification 12 Aug '13

12 Aug '13

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 14 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 32 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one package per architecture, even if it is a split package.) == New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (14 total) == * bbswitch-0.7-9 (i686) * cgminer-3.3.2-2 (i686) * r8168-8.036.00-6 (i686) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-39 (i686) * tp_smapi-0.41-30 (i686) * vhba-module-20130607-9 (i686) * virtualbox-modules-4.2.16-6 (i686) * bbswitch-0.7-9 (x86_64) * cgminer-3.3.2-2 (x86_64) * r8168-8.036.00-6 (x86_64) * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-39 (x86_64) * tp_smapi-0.41-30 (x86_64) * vhba-module-20130607-9 (x86_64) * virtualbox-modules-4.2.16-6 (x86_64) == Incomplete signoffs for [community] (32 total) == * bbswitch-0.7-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * calibre-0.9.43-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * cgminer-3.3.2-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * converseen-0.6.4-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * cuneiform-1.1.0-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * php-geoip-1.0.8-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * php-memcache-3.0.8-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * php-memcached-2.1.0-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * php-mongo-1.4.2-2 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * r8168-8.036.00-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rss-glx-0.9.1-16 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-39 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-30 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * vhba-module-20130607-9 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.2.16-6 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * xdebug-2.2.3-3 (i686) 0/1 signoffs * bbswitch-0.7-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * calibre-0.9.43-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * cgminer-3.3.2-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * converseen-0.6.4-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * cuneiform-1.1.0-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * php-geoip-1.0.8-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * php-memcache-3.0.8-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * php-memcached-2.1.0-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * php-mongo-1.4.2-2 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * r8168-8.036.00-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rss-glx-0.9.1-16 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * rt3562sta-2.4.1.1-39 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * tp_smapi-0.41-30 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * vhba-module-20130607-9 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * virtualbox-modules-4.2.16-6 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs * xdebug-2.2.3-3 (x86_64) 0/2 signoffs == Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1 0

[aur-general] Removal request for [megaupload-dl]
by Evan Teitelman 11 Aug '13

11 Aug '13

Please remove megaupload-dl[1]. The site megaupload.com was taken down[2] in 2012, rendering this package useless. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/megaupload-dl/ [2] http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/19/megaupload-taken-down-on-piracy-allegation…

2 1

[aur-general] Removal request: sdl_ttf-hg
by Davorin Učakar 11 Aug '13

11 Aug '13

Please remove sdl_ttf-hg (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sdl_ttf-hg/) It has been included in extra as sdl2_ttf.

2 1