On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Jaroslav Lichtblau email@example.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 10:50:29PM +0200, Laszlo Papp wrote:
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Heiko Baums firstname.lastname@example.org
<snip> > I think it's normal in the descussion period, if something is not clear, we > speak about > it. Feel free to ask me, if you have got doubts. >
Hi Laszlo, I got a look into your packages, this is what came up:
PKGBUILD (coldfire) W: Description should not contain the package name. PKGBUILD (eclipse-android) E: Missing md5sums PKGBUILD (huffman) W: Description should not contain the package name. PKGBUILD (koctave3) W: Attempting to use specific sourceforge mirror, use downloads.sourceforge.net instead PKGBUILD (lcdproc-g15) W: Variable license is not an array. PKGBUILD (lcdproc-g15) W: Attempting to use specific sourceforge mirror, use downloads.sourceforge.net instead PKGBUILD (lcdproc-g15) W: Missing Maintainer tag PKGBUILD (libticonv2) W: Missing Maintainer tag PKGBUILD (makedumpfile) E: File referenced in $startdir outside of $startdir/src or $startdir/pkg PKGBUILD (picasm) W: Description should not contain the package name. PKGBUILD (pikdev) W: Variable license is not an array. PKGBUILD (upslug2) W: Missing Maintainer tag PKGBUILD (vim-lustyexplorer) W: Missing Maintainer tag PKGBUILD (yapide) W: Description should not contain the package name.
Mainly cosmetic errors. Maybe, as you took the work to add yourself as a maintainer to some PKGBUILDs, why not to check the PKGBUILD as whole and clean up all errors. Namcap is always usefull, as you recommend to others on IRC/BBS.
While going through the list of your packages, I also looked on all packages you submitted to AUR. What I find interesting is, that many of them have actually a lot of votes gathered in the very short time they are present in AUR. About the half of all your submitted packages has more than 10 votes already - many of them are simple vim plugins. This looks a bit strange to me.
It's good to hear vim packages are so popular among my familiar and others. After I submitted those packages, I took an advertisment in vim channel on freenode, and among work colleague, and friends. Something similar, "More vim plugins are available in AUR, you can try it". It's true I've got so much VIM fan friends, colleague in the real life too, and on the internet too. Maybe this is the reason. But I'd like to focus for the embedded development related packages.
<snip> > > > > I can't do it with 300 packages really, I discussed it. I've done the > reassessment. > Well I accept the opinion from Xyne, It's not a bad thing to contribute > packages, even > if the user will disown that, because somebody can continue to maintain it, > and you > can reach those now too from AUR.
Here I have to say, I also don't have a problem in contributing any portion of packages, as long as they stay clean and build fine.
The task of a TU is especially maintaining and compiling packages in the community binary repository and to do administrative and security related stuff in the AUR like orphaning packages etc. A TU needs to be able to write working and trustworthy PKGBUILDs, and a TU needs some more than only basic scripting skills, because some applications need PKGBUILDs which are not quite trivial, the people - every Arch Linux user - rely on and trust the binary repositories in terms of security and stability. I don't see this with Laszlo.
Particularly see the symlink thing in his PKGBUILD for the library. If he was a Gentoo user for more than a year - I was one for about 6 years -, he should know, that a library doesn't have to be symlinked to keep or get reverse dependencies compatible to updated libraries. See revdep-rebuild, which every Gentoo user knows only too well. Symlinking a library can only be a quick and dirty workaround locally on one PC until the reverse depedency is rebuilt or fixed. If such a symlink is needed by another package, than he should file a feature request to upstream. So this shows me, that Laszlo doesn't have enough scripting and packaging skills, at least not enough to be able to build and maintain packages in a semi-official binary repository, which every user trusts.
You can ask Corrado/bardo in this matter, I've worked with him together
gcc-avr packages, and it wasn't quite trivial/simple to keep it in updated
We worked on it more days. I adopted some unclean packages that lasted me so much hours to fix,
they weren't so trivial for me. E.g. packages with kde3/kde4/qt3/qt4 compatibility problem, or cross-compiling packages with cross-toolchain. Yeah I've used revdep-rebuild while sleeping or working on other machine, because it was a long operation by me ;)
I also read his comment in the forums, which Xyne posted here.
Well the "Welcome to the forum" can be seen friendly. But then he writes "We must realize whether...", and just repeats, what Allan has already written. For me it sounds as he feels like already being a developer, or that he wants to presume to be one. I don't know Laszlo's intention, and I can do him wrong, but somehow it looks like craving for recognition, there are at least doubts.
So I don't know, if I could trust him enough.
I have to say, I share few concerns which were brought earlier by Allan and Loui. I find the recent huge increase of your activity a bit strange. I have to say, I do admire the time you put into all parts of Arch linux, but will need more time to be sure your intensions are really honest.
I don't have really any untrusted, unsincere purpose with forum, mailing list posts, because this distribution, community means much for me. I enjoy helping the newbies, and other users, if I can.
Okay, in this concrete example it wasn't sure for me he uses a good
it could cause the issue too, that was my plus idea. I don't feel really that, I'm
developer. I don't like Role-playing game :)
That's a pity, they are the best :)
I felt you will take a sentence for it after your Dragonlord name, and maybe we talked about it a little on the IRC in the past :)
Best Regards, Laszlo Papp