On Tue, Jun 22, 2021, 07:52 Eli Schwartz via aur-general < firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On 6/21/21 12:48 PM, Jayesh Badwaik via aur-general wrote:
May be a little off-topic from the application discussion but curious. What is a good way to get those packages in AUR then? Would `audacity-jayesh` or `audacity3` would be an appropriate replacement?
The deleted AUR package was "audacity3". Given one of the problems is the package doesn't build properly (when running cmake it git clones https://github.com/audacity/wxWidgets/commits/audacity-fixes-3.1.3 and uses the latest code currently on that branch) I'm skeptical it can be packaged correctly.
If it cannot be packaged correctly, then as one of the rare people who actually believes the AUR is supposed to ideally contain packages which follow the package guidelines (I know this will eternally be a work in progress at best, but I refuse to just give up and not even try), I don't believe it should be submitted to the AUR as an *incorrectly* packaged edition.
... much less uploaded as "audacity-but-actually-up-to-date". The usual standard for this sort of thing is to have an AUR *-bin package containing the upstream prebuilt binaries with presumably vendored everything, including their wxwidgets fork.
If anyone does figure out how to package it correctly for the AUR, then it doesn't belong in the AUR either :p email dvzrv / ainola to have the community package updated.
-- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User