On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Daniel Wallace <danielwallace@gtmanfred.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:41:50AM -0400, Yichao Yu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Daniel Wallace <danielwallace@gtmanfred.com> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:17:13AM -0400, Yichao Yu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Daniel Wallace <danielwallace@gtmanfred.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:25:58PM -0400, Yichao Yu wrote:
Hi,
A TU "gtmanfred" have just decided to remove one of my package just one minute after he commented on the package pointed out the missing package() in the PKGBUILD without any further explaination.
The package is python-django-git[0], which I have uploaded 2-3 days ago[1] to replacing two old packages including one with 3 vote that I uploaded last Nov.
I have already re-upload the package[0] since I don't think anything is wrong with the package (especially not for the package name, I can fix it if anything else with the package is wrong). And I just want to know if that was a delete by mistake or a missing package() somehow is enough reason to remove a package within ~1min after notifying the maintainer now?
Yichao Yu
[0] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-django-git/ [1] https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-March/022494.html
Please follow packageing guidelines, anything that touches $pkgdir should be inside the package() function.
repackaging without a package() function has been deprecated https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2010-April/010620.html
and PKGBUILDs without a package() function have been depricated https://patchwork.archlinux.org/patch/515/ https://www.archlinux.org/todo/clean-up-pkgdir-usage/
I agree, and I have already fixed it.
BUT, that is NOT what I am asking!! What I am REALLY asking here is why did you simply remove the package!! You can leave a comment (which you did 1min before you go right to the incorrect last step), flag it out-of-date, send me a email, or even disown it and correct it yourself according to the AUR two-week policy if I refuse to update. Is it what you think a TU should do to remove (without waiting for the shortest reasonable response time or even attempting to improve) all non-standard/old PKGBUILD on AUR.
It is fine if you have just removed it by accident (although I will probably suggest to move the remove button and the flag-out-of-date button farther away for TU if that's the case), but if you were doing that on purpose, what you did is totally non-constructive. This is definitely NOT what a TU should do. Let me remind you what a TU should do is "check PKGBUILDs for minor mistakes, suggest corrections and improvements"[1], I am not sure which of the three does "removing package right away" belong to.
[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#The_TU_and_...
-- Daniel Wallace Archlinux Trusted User (gtmanfred) Georgia Institute of Technology
If you read the front page of the AUR, you will note the following.
Contributed PKGBUILDs must conform to the Arch Packaging Standards otherwise they will be deleted!
OK, as you are happily deleting every single slightly non-standard AUR packages, I want to ask on the mailinglist when did removing package immediately becoming the rule.
-- Daniel Wallace Archlinux Trusted User (gtmanfred) Georgia Institute of Technology
For the record, I have only deleted NEWLY updated packages that are either.
A) Named incorrectly. Someone uploads a -git or -svn package and doesn't name it -git or -svn, it has no votes and no comments, so instead of waiting for it to get to a point where it would have to be merged, I leave a note explaining that it should be named correctly and then delete it.
This is probably fine but I think there should REALLY be a guide line on wiki or AT LEAST a NOTE on the mailing list ~1-2days before you start to do that.
B) it has no package() function. I am not going through all of the aur and deleting everything without a package() function. I am deleting newly uploaded packages that don't have a package() function. I noticed yours had 3 votes, I assumed it was because it was one of the first ones in my rss feed of new packages to the aur, and one of the oldest since the last time I had gone through them. If you check the AUR stats on teh side of the home page, you will not that 1/4th of all packages in the aur have never been updated. So instead of just leaving a note to add a package() function I delete them because it is brand new, almost no votes and usually no comments.
I'm assuming you remove "brand" new packages because they have no user. But 1, this is a simple rename of an old package, that is NOT NEW 2, there are 3 votes, which means it has user 3, since you already has rss for packages, why can't you be more responsible (as a TU) to come back at the package at least a couple of days later.
On this point, I don't believe we should be merging to any packages which do not properly meet the Packaging Guidelines.
-- Daniel Wallace Archlinux Trusted User (gtmanfred) Georgia Institute of Technology