Hi folks,
I am very happy that I finally get the chance to join AUR community and contribute something. I just adopted an orphan AUR package and submitted my first pkgbuild (see https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pycharm-community/). Is there anyone willing to double check that I didn't make stupid mistakes?
Regards,
On 07/26/2017 05:13 PM, J3thro via aur-general wrote:
Hi folks,
I am very happy that I finally get the chance to join AUR community and contribute something. I just adopted an orphan AUR package and submitted my first pkgbuild (see https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pycharm-community/). Is there anyone willing to double check that I didn't make stupid mistakes?
Well, it looks like all you did was bump the pkgver, which means all the stupid mistakes would be the fault of the previous maintainer. :D
My main objection would be that $srcdir and $pkgdir are not properly quoted. Likewise with $startdir, except that that is deprecated and it should be accessing the .desktop file from $srcdir instead.
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 05:13:05PM -0400, J3thro via aur-general wrote:
Hi folks,
I am very happy that I finally get the chance to join AUR community and contribute something. I just adopted an orphan AUR package and submitted my first pkgbuild (see https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pycharm-community/). Is there anyone willing to double check that I didn't make stupid mistakes?
Regards,
You have in your PKGBUILD
arch=('any')
and then later
if [[ $CARCH = 'i686' ]]; then …
Are these not contradictory? Or am I overlooking something?
Thanks, David
On 07/26/2017 06:04 PM, David Phillips wrote:
You have in your PKGBUILD
arch=('any')and then later
if [[ $CARCH = 'i686' ]]; then …Are these not contradictory? Or am I overlooking something?
Nope, and I'm not sure why I missed that either, this is definitely something namcap/pkglint would complain about as well.
...
Continuing to look at that PKGBUILD, I also notice it seems to build a Cython extension, in which case, cython really needs to be a makedepends. Also that part should be done in a build() function rather than package()
Hi Eli, David,
Thank you very much for the critiques.
1) I fixed the arch field, 2) moved the cython into the build function, and 3) fixed the startdir. One thing I do noticed is that the namcap is very vague about the errors, I have to manually figure out where and what is wrong there. Is there some other tools? (looks like pkglint doesn't have a aur pkg yet?)
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Eli Schwartz eschwartz@archlinux.org wrote:
On 07/26/2017 06:04 PM, David Phillips wrote:
You have in your PKGBUILD
arch=('any')and then later
if [[ $CARCH = 'i686' ]]; then …Are these not contradictory? Or am I overlooking something?
Nope, and I'm not sure why I missed that either, this is definitely something namcap/pkglint would complain about as well.
...
Continuing to look at that PKGBUILD, I also notice it seems to build a Cython extension, in which case, cython really needs to be a makedepends. Also that part should be done in a build() function rather than package()
-- Eli Schwartz
On 07/26/2017 09:08 PM, J3thro via aur-general wrote:
Hi Eli, David,
Thank you very much for the critiques.
- I fixed the arch field, 2) moved the cython into the build function, and
- fixed the startdir. One thing I do noticed is that the namcap is very
vague about the errors, I have to manually figure out where and what is wrong there. Is there some other tools? (looks like pkglint doesn't have a aur pkg yet?)
Automated linting tools are difficult by design. :) The general idea is to raise warning flags that tell you to investigate yourself. That being said, we do try, so if there is somewhere you think namcap could do a better job warning you, feel free to discuss this on the [arch-projects] mailing list (which is where namcap development takes place).
pkglint is a *partial* attempt to reimplement namcap in bash as a libmakepkg extension
Very interesting, thank you very much!
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Eli Schwartz eschwartz@archlinux.org wrote:
On 07/26/2017 09:08 PM, J3thro via aur-general wrote:
Hi Eli, David,
Thank you very much for the critiques.
- I fixed the arch field, 2) moved the cython into the build function,
and
- fixed the startdir. One thing I do noticed is that the namcap is very
vague about the errors, I have to manually figure out where and what is wrong there. Is there some other tools? (looks like pkglint doesn't have
a
aur pkg yet?)
Automated linting tools are difficult by design. :) The general idea is to raise warning flags that tell you to investigate yourself. That being said, we do try, so if there is somewhere you think namcap could do a better job warning you, feel free to discuss this on the [arch-projects] mailing list (which is where namcap development takes place).
pkglint is a *partial* attempt to reimplement namcap in bash as a libmakepkg extension
-- Eli Schwartz
Hello
As we all know JetBrains' products are widely used by many programmers, by ArchLinux users too. Their download servers are extremely slow though. I'd love to see PyCharm in community, I even contacted a TU a few months ago. The thing is there's a maintainer needed willing to adopt the package. I hope someone sees this and takes care of that application.
Marcin Wieczorek
Excerpts from J3thro via aur-general's message of July 26, 2017 11:13 pm:
Hi folks,
I am very happy that I finally get the chance to join AUR community and contribute something. I just adopted an orphan AUR package and submitted my first pkgbuild (see https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pycharm-community/). Is there anyone willing to double check that I didn't make stupid mistakes?
Regards,
Hi Marcin,
I think you missed something in the thread, I am the maintainer of this package right now :)
On Jul 28, 2017 6:58 PM, "Marcin Wieczorek" marcin@marcin.co wrote:
Hello
As we all know JetBrains' products are widely used by many programmers, by ArchLinux users too. Their download servers are extremely slow though. I'd love to see PyCharm in community, I even contacted a TU a few months ago. The thing is there's a maintainer needed willing to adopt the package. I hope someone sees this and takes care of that application.
Marcin Wieczorek
Excerpts from J3thro via aur-general's message of July 26, 2017 11:13 pm:
Hi folks,
I am very happy that I finally get the chance to join AUR community and contribute something. I just adopted an orphan AUR package and submitted my first pkgbuild (see https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pycharm-community/ ). Is there anyone willing to double check that I didn't make stupid mistakes?
Regards,
On 07/28/2017 07:40 PM, J3thro via aur-general wrote:
Hi Marcin,
I think you missed something in the thread, I am the maintainer of this package right now :)
I don't think he missed anything, he's complaining that the package isn't in the official repositories as a binary package.
In other words, offtopic, just ignore him.
...
Aside: what's with all the top-posting? General mailing list etiquette is to bottom-post, and it certainly gets very confusing when some people top-post and some people bottom-post.
Em julho 28, 2017 20:40 J3thro via aur-general escreveu:
I think you missed something in the thread, I am the maintainer of this package right now :)
The OP mean for it to be maintained on the community repository, and, therefore not need to be built and downloaded from Jetbrains servers everytime a new update arrives.
I would take it to community, but I don't know if we have any licensing issues that would prevent us from doing so. If there aren't any issues, I would move it.
If I knew it was orphaned on the AUR, I would have adopted it as well, since I use pycharm on Arch on a daily basis. I'll revisit this soon.
Cheers, Giancarlo Razzolini
On 2017-07-29 03:39, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
Em julho 28, 2017 20:40 J3thro via aur-general escreveu:
I think you missed something in the thread, I am the maintainer of this package right now :)
The OP mean for it to be maintained on the community repository, and, therefore not need to be built and downloaded from Jetbrains servers everytime a new update arrives.
I would take it to community, but I don't know if we have any licensing issues that would prevent us from doing so. If there aren't any issues, I would move it.
If I knew it was orphaned on the AUR, I would have adopted it as well, since I use pycharm on Arch on a daily basis. I'll revisit this soon.
Cheers, Giancarlo Razzolini
Community edition is open source and published under Apache2 license. I don't know how that fits redistributing their binary though.
Community edition is open source and published under Apache2 license. I don't know how that fits redistributing their binary though.
Yeah it is. I went looking into the build process for it and it looks like it's a mess, but it would be doable. I guess that compiling on the package and redistributing that wouldn't infringe anything, but I will take a second look at this. It would certainly be nice not to have to download from their site which is, indeed, slow.
Cheers, Giancarlo Razzolini
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org