- Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] deletion request: squeak, squeak-basicimage, squeak-fullimage
by solsTiCe d'Hiver 05 Dec '10

05 Dec '10

hi. squeak-basicimage and squeak-fullimage refer to old image of squeak image file. also the package do not build anymore because the sources are not there. squeak.org does not provide basic or full but just images for now. So would it makes sense to remove them ? I have transformed squeak package into squeak-vm (renamed it). So squeak package could be removed also. I have emailed drgeo maintainer of the changes to not break dependancy there if you delete squeak package as expected. I would like squeak users, if there is ones over here, to test squeak-vm and squeak-image, because I am not a squeak user. http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=3705 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=3707 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=3706

2 4

[aur-general] arduino cleanup
by PyroPeter 05 Dec '10

05 Dec '10

Hello AUR users! I borrowed an arduino recently and found the *arduino*-part of the AUR to be very messy. Here are my findings: ## arduino64-updated [1] Outdated for ages, the copy of a copy of the arduino-PKGBUILD. Can be deleted. ## arduino64 [2] and arduino [3] The difference is difficult to find, the descriptions do not help in any way. arduino depends on avrdude, while arduino64 includes an outdated, but patched avrdude from the Arduino-project. I wrote an architecture-independent PKGBUILD that could replace arduino and an adapted one that includes the patched avrdude. It could replace arduino64. I am not sure about the naming of the two new packages, but I think it would make sense to call the package with included avrdude "arduino", because the Arduino SDK includes avrdude by default. The other one could be called "arduino_unpatched". (I am using an underscore here to distinguish it from the "mainname-modulename" notation used by arduino-onewire (which is an add-on for arduino) tl,dr: arduino64 can be deleted, I would like arduino to be orphaned. ## arduino-pyro [4] I uploaded my new PKGBUILD for the arduino-without-avrdude package under this name to get feedback. It can be deleted. Regards, PyroPeter [1] arduino64-updated https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32041 [2] arduino64 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24053 [3] arduino https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=8388 [4] arduino-pyro https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43902 -- freenode/pyropeter "12:50 - Ich drücke Return."

3 9

[aur-general] moving packages to community
by Ike Devolder 05 Dec '10

05 Dec '10

Thx guys for letting me know you would move some packages from AUR to community thats really stimulating to contribute something if you dont know what i'm talking about - libssh2 ( i picked it up after bash dropped it in AUR) - podofo (cant remember how i picked it up) It would just be a little polite , just to let someone know the move will be done cant be that hard to send a mail ;)

3 3

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