I think it's wrong way. Some of packages just install old versions, they can be adopted by users and updated easily. Take a look at helium, for example. Fully working pkgbuild, only pkgver needs to be changed to get it up-to-date. Firstly we must take care about really obsolette packages. For example - sim-im. SVN snapshop, even when we have normal SVN pkgbuild and normal stable pkgbuild. So sim-im must be removed. And so on. When we finish cleaning up obsoletes, we can start cleaning up orphans. Here is my vision how this must work: 1. There is addittional button on pkgbuild's page - Report obsolete. 2. If user clicks this button, notify will be sent, for example, to aur-mods maillist 3. Mod will remove this packages 4. Package must be moved to some sort of archive - there will always be human mistakes. That archive can be cleaned, for example, every month. Or not cleaned at all - pkgbuilds are pretty small :) 5. When user try to create new PKGBUILD with pkgname = name of previously removed pkgbuild, maybe we must print some notice and link to old pkgbuild. Old projects can be revived sometimes. On 03/02/10 19:55, Lauri Niskanen wrote:
On 02/03/2010 07:48 PM, Lex Rivera wrote:
The main reason why a asked for it is amount of crap in AUR. I have my own repo, maybe that's why i'm not interested in [community]. But AUR have huge list of orphaned, outdated, obsolette packages. Most of them can be deleted, since they have no use now. I see them nearly everyday, and... Well, i think you catch that. AUR needs moderators. AUR must be clean. Sorry for my bad english =(
On 03/02/10 12:31, Angel Velásquez wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Chris Brannon <cmbrannon79@gmail.com> wrote:
Thomas Bächler wrote:
I think it is a good idea. We could create the "AUR moderator" position instead of calling it "Semi-TU".
This is a fine idea, and I see no harm in it.
Im in favour of this, my unique concern is about how hard will be creating another level of permission in the AUR, and some rules about, if a semi-tu can orphan packages from TUs or TU-Dev, figuring out that part, and assuming that will have an approbation, we will start writting patches, so this can be a "slow" process, (2 months or so if it's aproved? plus the time of discussion?).
Let's see what happens!
-- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
Let's start the cleaning here: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?O=0&do_Orphans=Orphans&detail=0&C=0&SeB=nd&SB=v&SO=a&PP=25&outdated=on
Maybe we should just delete all packages with no votes and that have been orphaned.
-- Ape <Lauri Niskanen>