[aur-general] Moving some popular games from AUR to community
I'd like to move the following games from AUR but I wanted to avoid any potential tears this time, thus I'm posting my sinister intentions here first. urbanterror supertuxkart ufoai yofrankie freecol blobby2 Let the drama begin! Or just give me a thumbs up or something. -- Sven-Hendrik
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh@lutzhaase.com>wrote:
I'd like to move the following games from AUR but I wanted to avoid any potential tears this time, thus I'm posting my sinister intentions here first.
urbanterror supertuxkart ufoai yofrankie freecol blobby2
Let the drama begin! Or just give me a thumbs up or something.
I would say yes to all of them, but what about the arch-games repo? How will these two coexist?
On 15.08.2010 07:50, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I would say yes to all of them, but what about the arch-games repo? How will these two coexist?
arch-games is unofficial and has proven to be rather unreliable in the past. I'd like at least the most popular games to receive official blessing and support in our bug tracker. To me this seems like it would be the most consistent and easy way for users. The games would then either be removed from arch-games or not, it's their choice. Duplication of efforts is probably not a good thing, though.
On Sun 15 Aug 2010 08:30 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 15.08.2010 07:50, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I would say yes to all of them, but what about the arch-games repo? How will these two coexist?
arch-games is unofficial and has proven to be rather unreliable in the past. I'd like at least the most popular games to receive official blessing and support in our bug tracker. To me this seems like it would be the most consistent and easy way for users. The games would then either be removed from arch-games or not, it's their choice. Duplication of efforts is probably not a good thing, though.
Well, the only way to fix that would be to use it and contribute to it. If you shun arch-games then it's more likely to remain in the dark, so I encourage everyone to use arch-games and maintain their game packages there.
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun 15 Aug 2010 08:30 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 15.08.2010 07:50, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I would say yes to all of them, but what about the arch-games repo? How will these two coexist?
arch-games is unofficial and has proven to be rather unreliable in the past. I'd like at least the most popular games to receive official blessing and support in our bug tracker. To me this seems like it would be the most consistent and easy way for users. The games would then either be removed from arch-games or not, it's their choice. Duplication of efforts is probably not a good thing, though.
Well, the only way to fix that would be to use it and contribute to it. If you shun arch-games then it's more likely to remain in the dark, so I encourage everyone to use arch-games and maintain their game packages there.
arch-games is a good option IMO, big packages repo, was my original idea (a year ago), but ... having many repos can be a mess (I agree in this part with you Sven), but as I said, we are a 30 gb or more distro on binary packages, that doesn't mean that we have few packages, other distros have more architectures (case Debian) or their compression system on the packages is very old fashioned and poor. Splitting games or big packages as much as can be splitted is the way to go, but as I said, if the maintainer can handle the situation, then I won't have any issue accepting games, maybe in a short-future I will play them =P -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
On 08/15/2010 07:02 PM, Angel Velásquez wrote:
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Loui Chang<louipc.ist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun 15 Aug 2010 08:30 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
On 15.08.2010 07:50, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I would say yes to all of them, but what about the arch-games repo? How will these two coexist?
arch-games is unofficial and has proven to be rather unreliable in the past. I'd like at least the most popular games to receive official blessing and support in our bug tracker. To me this seems like it would be the most consistent and easy way for users. The games would then either be removed from arch-games or not, it's their choice. Duplication of efforts is probably not a good thing, though.
Well, the only way to fix that would be to use it and contribute to it. If you shun arch-games then it's more likely to remain in the dark, so I encourage everyone to use arch-games and maintain their game packages there.
arch-games is a good option IMO, big packages repo, was my original idea (a year ago), but ... having many repos can be a mess (I agree in this part with you Sven), but as I said, we are a 30 gb or more distro on binary packages, that doesn't mean that we have few packages, other distros have more architectures (case Debian) or their compression system on the packages is very old fashioned and poor.
Splitting games or big packages as much as can be splitted is the way to go, but as I said, if the maintainer can handle the situation, then I won't have any issue accepting games, maybe in a short-future I will play them =P
One possibility would be some kind of a delta encoding upgrade system. It doesn't help when it's the case of just binary executables, but when we have a game with lots of data files you don't probably need to update everytime all of those. Splitting packages is a solution for this issue, but a general synchronization based on single files would do the job in a modern way. In short: Why to compress a set of binary data files to a one huge package? -- Ape <Lauri Niskanen>
On 15/08/10 17:13, Lauri Niskanen wrote:
One possibility would be some kind of a delta encoding upgrade system. It doesn't help when it's the case of just binary executables, but when we have a game with lots of data files you don't probably need to update everytime all of those. Splitting packages is a solution for this issue, but a general synchronization based on single files would do the job in a modern way.
In short: Why to compress a set of binary data files to a one huge package?
I'm hoping my insight is relevant to the discussion here. If not, sorry. Anyway... There's no need for any delta anything, as the current norm is to split the data from the games (I'd be surprised if A-G doesn't already do this) as can be seen (as a side effect) of the -any architecture wherein data files etc that are not executable are placed in a -data pkg. These pkgs usually contain the bulk of that large size, e.g a pkg that totals 800MiB would have a -data part that is over 750MiB and as we all know when a pkg is updated to cause a pkgrel bump it's usually the executables that get updated so the -data pkg remains the same, no extra bandwidth need be wasted. To put this into context the ARM, last time I checked was approx 6 months in retention (IIRC) totalling less than 100GiB ofcourse this is all from memory so the numbers might be off but you get the general idea. The Arch repos as seen today: 2010/08/15 has a total of 11245 .pkg files in all 3 architecture groups(-i686, -x86_64 and -any) and the number doesn't change all that much day to day so put that into context of: these large games are typically released once or twice a year, we start to see that the bandwidth costs aren't that bad. In my case I think it'd be nicer for all these games to be in A-G because it's then a little easier to find potential new games without needing to enter the pkg jungle you'd get with the other repos. I should admit that finding new games to play is the main reason I use A-G since I only play TC:E which is mostly a copy from a Windows install years ago and commercial games.
To bring this thread to a conclusion, I decided to start the work on including the packages. I will do my best to separate out -data stuff to the any architecture to save space. This and the sage move are are quite unusually large packages and therefore I don't see it happening again in the near future. On 15.08.2010 18:57, Nathan Wayde wrote:
In my case I think it'd be nicer for all these games to be in A-G because it's then a little easier to find potential new games without needing to enter the pkg jungle you'd get with the other repos. I should admit that finding new games to play is the main reason I use A-G since I only play TC:E which is mostly a copy from a Windows install years ago and commercial games.
In the long run we might have to find a different solution unless the primary sync server becomes faster than 10mbit. Your suggestion might work if either we make [games] official or if we make all games unofficial. We should probably discuss this in the other thread though. -- Sven-Hendrik
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 01:50, Thomas Dziedzic <gostrc@gmail.com> wrote:
I would say yes to all of them, but what about the arch-games repo? How will these two coexist?
The intent of arch-games is to act as a supplement for the community repo for packages which aren't in it. It'll just get removed from there if it goes to community.
On 15/08/10 15:47, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
I'd like to move the following games from AUR but I wanted to avoid any potential tears this time, thus I'm posting my sinister intentions here first.
...
supertuxkart ...
That was in [community] not to long ago but I dropped it when no-one offered to take over maintenance. Isn't ufoai massive? Allan
On 15.08.2010 08:20, Allan McRae wrote:
On 15/08/10 15:47, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
I'd like to move the following games from AUR but I wanted to avoid any potential tears this time, thus I'm posting my sinister intentions here first.
...
supertuxkart ...
That was in [community] not to long ago but I dropped it when no-one offered to take over maintenance.
I don't think I was a TU by the time that it was dropped but I'd take it now.
Isn't ufoai massive?
Allan
UFO:AI is 5M + 500M. It's one of the bigger packages for sure. Along with the potential Urban Terror 700M. It's up there with Nexuiz 870M and VDrift 515M. It's not a problem for our mirrors as the Arch binary repos are completely dwarfed by other distributions. It's also not a maintenance issue for me as I got the needed uplink to upload these from time to time. Besides, I don't think there will be a lot more big packages to come after these, at least in the near future.
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh@lutzhaase.com> wrote:
On 15.08.2010 08:20, Allan McRae wrote:
On 15/08/10 15:47, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
I'd like to move the following games from AUR but I wanted to avoid any potential tears this time, thus I'm posting my sinister intentions here first.
...
supertuxkart ...
That was in [community] not to long ago but I dropped it when no-one offered to take over maintenance.
I don't think I was a TU by the time that it was dropped but I'd take it now.
Isn't ufoai massive?
Allan
UFO:AI is 5M + 500M. It's one of the bigger packages for sure. Along with the potential Urban Terror 700M. It's up there with Nexuiz 870M and VDrift 515M. It's not a problem for our mirrors as the Arch binary repos are completely dwarfed by other distributions. It's also not a maintenance issue for me as I got the needed uplink to upload these from time to time. Besides, I don't think there will be a lot more big packages to come after these, at least in the near future.
Well, I am not against those games.. and stuff, but, if adding 6 games == ~3GB .. repos will have to syncronize and waste a lot of bandwith with these games. I'd say that since games are popular they should have their own repo .. like [games] (please don't kill me), last time I said that was because of nexuiz .. so people who like to have some repos, can decide if download games or not... (I particurarly won't do it for my personal purposes since I don't use to game, not in pc, not in Linux, not now :P). But if those packages are popular and maintainer can handle the bandwidth and mirrors won't complain about it, im fine with it. Cheers -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
On 15.08.2010 09:16, Angel Velásquez wrote:
Well, I am not against those games.. and stuff, but, if adding 6 games == ~3GB .. repos will have to syncronize and waste a lot of bandwith with these games.
The toll will be 1600MB at worst, so not that big of an issue. Even then, I kind of dislike the use of "waste" here. If these packages are useful or even fun, how can one be talking of a waste? Also, 1600MB in either disk space or bandwidth should be not a problem at all for our mirrors compared to the daily amount Ubuntu/Debian/Fedora packages, ISO spins and whatnot that they have to mirror. Debian alone takes 430GB for a full mirror. Arch is smaller than a tenth of that.
I'd say that since games are popular they should have their own repo .. like [games] (please don't kill me), last time I said that was because of nexuiz .. so people who like to have some repos, can decide if download games or not... (I particurarly won't do it for my personal purposes since I don't use to game, not in pc, not in Linux, not now :P).
If mirror size and bandwidth are not issues, how to justify a [games] repo? Also, [games] may only mark the beginning. Why not also [office], [multimedia] and [dev]? I really don't want to go there. Adding more repos will only make Arch less simple but what do we gain?
But if those packages are popular and maintainer can handle the bandwidth and mirrors won't complain about it, im fine with it.
Cheers
Well, I said I'd be fine with the maintaining.
Le dimanche 15 août 2010 09:38:06, Sven-Hendrik Haase a écrit :
On 15.08.2010 09:16, Angel Velásquez wrote:
Well, I am not against those games.. and stuff, but, if adding 6 games == ~3GB .. repos will have to syncronize and waste a lot of bandwith with these games.
The toll will be 1600MB at worst, so not that big of an issue. Even then, I kind of dislike the use of "waste" here. If these packages are useful or even fun, how can one be talking of a waste? Also, 1600MB in either disk space or bandwidth should be not a problem at all for our mirrors compared to the daily amount Ubuntu/Debian/Fedora packages, ISO spins and whatnot that they have to mirror. Debian alone takes 430GB for a full mirror. Arch is smaller than a tenth of that.
I'd say that since games are popular they should have their own repo .. like [games] (please don't kill me), last time I said that was because of nexuiz .. so people who like to have some repos, can decide if download games or not... (I particurarly won't do it for my personal purposes since I don't use to game, not in pc, not in Linux, not now :P).
If mirror size and bandwidth are not issues, how to justify a [games] repo? Also, [games] may only mark the beginning. Why not also [office], [multimedia] and [dev]? I really don't want to go there. Adding more repos will only make Arch less simple but what do we gain?
But if those packages are popular and maintainer can handle the bandwidth and mirrors won't complain about it, im fine with it.
Cheers
Well, I said I'd be fine with the maintaining.
Lot of packages could be splitted to get a common data part. ++
On 15 August 2010 17:49, Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com> wrote:
Le dimanche 15 août 2010 09:38:06, Sven-Hendrik Haase a écrit :
On 15.08.2010 09:16, Angel Velásquez wrote:
Well, I am not against those games.. and stuff, but, if adding 6 games == ~3GB .. repos will have to syncronize and waste a lot of bandwith with these games.
The toll will be 1600MB at worst, so not that big of an issue. Even then, I kind of dislike the use of "waste" here. If these packages are useful or even fun, how can one be talking of a waste? Also, 1600MB in either disk space or bandwidth should be not a problem at all for our mirrors compared to the daily amount Ubuntu/Debian/Fedora packages, ISO spins and whatnot that they have to mirror. Debian alone takes 430GB for a full mirror. Arch is smaller than a tenth of that.
I'd say that since games are popular they should have their own repo .. like [games] (please don't kill me), last time I said that was because of nexuiz .. so people who like to have some repos, can decide if download games or not... (I particurarly won't do it for my personal purposes since I don't use to game, not in pc, not in Linux, not now :P).
If mirror size and bandwidth are not issues, how to justify a [games] repo? Also, [games] may only mark the beginning. Why not also [office], [multimedia] and [dev]? I really don't want to go there. Adding more repos will only make Arch less simple but what do we gain?
But if those packages are popular and maintainer can handle the bandwidth and mirrors won't complain about it, im fine with it.
Cheers
Well, I said I'd be fine with the maintaining.
Lot of packages could be splitted to get a common data part.
I'm with angvp on this. As long as we don't get any significant 'oh-crap' from this being done, I'll be more than happy to have allowed you to do this. So, go ahead. Btw, third-party repos should never be a factor here. Arch-Games is independent (and it works). And also, try to refrain from comparing to other distros. It's none of our business. Caveat: I like UrbanTerror. -- GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 20:27:29 +0800 Ray Rashif <schivmeister@gmail.com> wrote:
On 15 August 2010 17:49, Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com> wrote:
Le dimanche 15 août 2010 09:38:06, Sven-Hendrik Haase a écrit :
On 15.08.2010 09:16, Angel Velásquez wrote:
Well, I am not against those games.. and stuff, but, if adding 6 games == ~3GB .. repos will have to syncronize and waste a lot of bandwith with these games.
The toll will be 1600MB at worst, so not that big of an issue. Even then, I kind of dislike the use of "waste" here. If these packages are useful or even fun, how can one be talking of a waste? Also, 1600MB in either disk space or bandwidth should be not a problem at all for our mirrors compared to the daily amount Ubuntu/Debian/Fedora packages, ISO spins and whatnot that they have to mirror. Debian alone takes 430GB for a full mirror. Arch is smaller than a tenth of that.
I'd say that since games are popular they should have their own repo .. like [games] (please don't kill me), last time I said that was because of nexuiz .. so people who like to have some repos, can decide if download games or not... (I particurarly won't do it for my personal purposes since I don't use to game, not in pc, not in Linux, not now :P).
If mirror size and bandwidth are not issues, how to justify a [games] repo? Also, [games] may only mark the beginning. Why not also [office], [multimedia] and [dev]? I really don't want to go there. Adding more repos will only make Arch less simple but what do we gain?
But if those packages are popular and maintainer can handle the bandwidth and mirrors won't complain about it, im fine with it.
Cheers
Well, I said I'd be fine with the maintaining.
Lot of packages could be splitted to get a common data part.
I'm with angvp on this. As long as we don't get any significant 'oh-crap' from this being done, I'll be more than happy to have allowed you to do this. So, go ahead.
Btw, third-party repos should never be a factor here. Arch-Games is independent (and it works).
And also, try to refrain from comparing to other distros. It's none of our business.
Caveat: I like UrbanTerror.
I fully agree with Angel and Ray, you can't argument with the behaviour of other distributions, also you can't argument with the mirror size, I might be wrong but as far as I know there are several mirrors out there sponsored by private people who only can sponsor them because our repos are so small and only take up half of their servers space. I haven't checked the current global situation but I remember one german user who did so. So I suggest that we might should think about a special mathematical rule for package bundles that are larger a certain size(200 / 300MB?) in order to vaguely determine if it's useful to have them in [community] or not. An initial idea would be to take an estimated amount of users and divide this through the sum of the size of the packages and the vote for them, if the result is smaller y then it's okay. A sample with urbanterror: number_of_users = 5000 package_votes = 380 package_size = 730 (fictional sized urbanterror splitted + both arches) 5000 / (380+730) = ~4.5 So if we say "Hey we want the result around [logical-]or beneath 10." this would be fine. Now the same for openarena: number_of_users = 5000 package_votes = 64 package_size = 315 (also fictional, non splitted x86_64 has 307MB) 5000/(64+315) = ~13.2 So we see this package won't fit yet, with some more votes it sure would (I assume it won't grow in size that much that fast). So if it get's another load of 64 votes and thus has 128 votes it's ~11.2 and therefore it's not bad to think about a move for one of us. However don't forget that except for the number of votes both calculations were based on more(number of users) and less(packages size) fictional numbers and this formula is not tested with more than those two samples. -- Jabber: atsutane@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4
participants (11)
-
Allan McRae
-
Angel Velásquez
-
Daenyth Blank
-
Laurent Carlier
-
Lauri Niskanen
-
Loui Chang
-
Nathan Wayde
-
Ray Rashif
-
Sven-Hendrik Haase
-
Thomas Dziedzic
-
Thorsten Töpper