On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Daniel Wallace <danielwallace@gtmanfred.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:05:04AM +0000, Xyne wrote:
Ionut Biru wrote:
Well, technically, it is just ~23h from my last email but hopefully Brock.Zheng will agree to call this "one day". :P
mate, you did something wrong, stop trying to find out excuses for your actions.
please do not delete builds like that anymore, leave comments about any issues with the build and give them time to accommodate with the changes
This.
Obliterating votes and comments and forcing the user to recreate the package does not help anyone, and one minute is not enough to read a comment, address the issue and re-upload the package even if the maintainer is glued to the chair slamming F5. It discourages new users from continuing to contribute and it leaves a very bad impression of the TUs and Arch by extension.
Did you actually read what I explained what I did? because your first sentence would cause me to believe you didn't. I specifically said I did not delete any packages that had comments on them or any substantial amount of votes. This one packages that is being complained about had 3 votes, that is 2 more than any other packages, and all of the other ones were only voted on by the maintainer.
Bartłomiej Piotrowski wrote:
What's the point of your drama? It was perfectly correct to remove it (especially if it was new package). You reuploaded and fixed it. Everyone is happy, hurray!
Everyone is clearly not happy. If you honestly think that it's just "drama" when a user has a valid complaint about an overzealous TU then I think you need to reconsider your viewpoint. TUs are not beyond scrutiny. If anything we should be held to a higher standard than other users.
I was happy before this last reply since I think everyone agrees there shouldn't be immediate package removal just because the PKGBUILD is not completely following the standard as well as starts to document the case for future references, but not now since clearly someone still think he should delete the package immediately just because he doesn't want to spend less than one more minute recording it and coming back on it even one week later. I don't really think any PKGBUILD should be removed unless it is not useful anymore (replaced by other packages, drop by upstream) since AUR is a place to share useful PKGBUILD and let all users to improve them (instead of examine normal users for their packaging skills as well as reaction time). I have seen many examples on aur-general (well 2-3 at least) of packages being requested to be removed either because the package maintainer want to drop them or even don't build but all end up staying orphan in AUR because they can easily be fixed and may still be helpful to others. Another problem that may be caused by this kind of removal is the PKGBUILD may just be lost. I personally don't keep a copy of some of the PKGBUILD I am maintaining locally before I started to do that for all my PKGBUILD's one month ago. I don't think that's a requirement either. I may be wrong (maybe it is hidden in somewhere in the wiki I haven't found), but I don't think not keeping a local copy will cause any problem unless someone decide to pointlessly remove them from AUR.
The users complaint is valid. Fine, he asked for it to be merged to the new package name, and I missed it on aur-general.
How about this, I would like to lodge a complaint against the TU that merged the package in the first place without checking for it's validity and following of packaging guidelines.
Well, everyone make mistakes, but that should NOT be a excuse to discourage anyone to upload new PKGBUILD's. A TU may check for errors on PKGBUILDs before performing any actions but I don't think it is possible to check for all possible errors especially when there is no tools to do that automatically (or before pacman start to complain about it for the package() case). And there is also no reason to reject a merge if the new one is better than the old one(s). If you would REALLY like to complaint about this, may I just remind you that you have at least 5 packages on AUR with missing quote on srcdir, or is that following your own PKGBUILD standard. I am not saying they should be removed immediately but somehow I don't think that supports what you have just said very well.
As for my own anecdote, you will find many comments from me linking to updated PKGBUILDs that I kindly *recommend* to the maintainer. I wait a few weeks for a reply and then either post again or email the maintainer. I think it is the most effective way encourage users to adhere to packaging standards and adopt better PKGBUILD styles.
YES ABSOLUTELY! I do this, all the time! Including on one of yours today! Right after you complained about environment variables not being quoted because they might include spaces.
Well, see above and check yourself as well, please....
Alexander Rødseth wrote:
tl;dr Ioni is always right
What alternate reality is this? :P
I have no comment
Am I supposed to say sth about this too?...
-- Daniel Wallace Archlinux Trusted User (gtmanfred) Georgia Institute of Technology