[aur-general] Please orphan haskell-convertible-text
Hi, the package <http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34179> has been out-of-date for a while, and the maintainers respond neither to e-mail nor to messages left on AUR. Could you please orphan the package? Take care, Peter
Peter Simons wrote:
Hi,
the package <http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34179> has been out-of-date for a while, and the maintainers respond neither to e-mail nor to messages left on AUR. Could you please orphan the package?
Take care, Peter
I noticed your request to orphan haskell-numeric-prelude too. Have you contacted Arch Haskell (i.e. Don Stewart) about those packages? I'm reluctant to orphan packages from the Arch Haskell group because it's an "official" group tasked with managing Haskell packages globally across the repos and the AUR. At the same time, I know that Don is often too busy to deal with issues and that this causes problems for many users because they have to wait for him to get around to running global scripts, which he often postpones for months at a time. I fully understand how frustrating that must be. Personally I think that Arch Haskell should create it's own repo and ABS tree. In fact, I'll propose that on the arch-haskell list right now. Regards, Xyne
Xyne wrote:
At the same time, I know that Don is often too busy to deal with issues and that this causes problems for many users because they have to wait for him to get around to running global scripts, which he often postpones for months at a time. I fully understand how frustrating that must be.
s/often/sometimes/ Also, after contacting Don on the arch-haskell list, he claims to only be about a week behind with the AUR, which really isn't that much considering the number of packages he maintains.
Personally I think that Arch Haskell should create it's own repo and ABS tree. In fact, I'll propose that on the arch-haskell list right now.
I have brought this up on arch-haskell. Anyone who is interested in the discussion can follow it there.
Hi Xyne,
I'm reluctant to orphan packages from the Arch Haskell group because it's an "official" group tasked with managing Haskell packages globally across the repos and the AUR.
I am sorry, but I have had this discussion on this list too many times already. I don't care to discuss this topic again. haskell-numeric-prelude and haskell-convertible-text are both out of date. I am willing to maintain both packages. Do do that, however, I need a TU to orphan them so that I can take over ownership. If that is not an option for some reason, then that's fine too. Do whatever you think is right. Take care, Peter
On 8 October 2010 00:13, Peter Simons <simons@cryp.to> wrote:
Hi Xyne,
> I'm reluctant to orphan packages from the Arch Haskell group because > it's an "official" group tasked with managing Haskell packages > globally across the repos and the AUR.
I am sorry, but I have had this discussion on this list too many times already. I don't care to discuss this topic again.
haskell-numeric-prelude and haskell-convertible-text are both out of date. I am willing to maintain both packages. Do do that, however, I need a TU to orphan them so that I can take over ownership. If that is not an option for some reason, then that's fine too. Do whatever you think is right.
Take care, Peter
+1. This topic is brought up here too many times. We should be glad that there still are people willing to maintain Haskell packages actively. Now the Arch Haskell has a monopoly for all haskell packages and frankly I don't see any advantage of it. In my opinion we should break the monopoly and allow the users to maintain Haskell packages too. It's reasonable to orphan packages which are out-of-date for a long time. Lukas
Why not ask volunteers to join the ArchHaskell team? -- Rémy. 2010/10/8, Lukáš Jirkovský <l.jirkovsky@gmail.com>:
On 8 October 2010 00:13, Peter Simons <simons@cryp.to> wrote:
Hi Xyne,
> I'm reluctant to orphan packages from the Arch Haskell group because > it's an "official" group tasked with managing Haskell packages > globally across the repos and the AUR.
I am sorry, but I have had this discussion on this list too many times already. I don't care to discuss this topic again.
haskell-numeric-prelude and haskell-convertible-text are both out of date. I am willing to maintain both packages. Do do that, however, I need a TU to orphan them so that I can take over ownership. If that is not an option for some reason, then that's fine too. Do whatever you think is right.
Take care, Peter
+1. This topic is brought up here too many times. We should be glad that there still are people willing to maintain Haskell packages actively.
Now the Arch Haskell has a monopoly for all haskell packages and frankly I don't see any advantage of it. In my opinion we should break the monopoly and allow the users to maintain Haskell packages too. It's reasonable to orphan packages which are out-of-date for a long time.
Lukas
On 2010-10-08 08:33 +0200 (40:5) Rémy Oudompheng wrote:
Why not ask volunteers to join the ArchHaskell team?
Because there is no way to group-manage AUR packages. Don has apparently been working on scripts for a while but so far there has been no visible progress.
On Thu 07 Oct 2010 20:40 +0200, Xyne wrote:
Peter Simons wrote:
the package <http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34179> has been out-of-date for a while, and the maintainers respond neither to e-mail nor to messages left on AUR. Could you please orphan the package?
I noticed your request to orphan haskell-numeric-prelude too. Have you contacted Arch Haskell (i.e. Don Stewart) about those packages?
I'm reluctant to orphan packages from the Arch Haskell group because it's an "official" group tasked with managing Haskell packages globally across the repos and the AUR.
At the same time, I know that Don is often too busy to deal with issues and that this causes problems for many users because they have to wait for him to get around to running global scripts, which he often postpones for months at a time. I fully understand how frustrating that must be.
But the AUR is unofficial. I suggest that if Arch Haskell's packages are out of date for an unreasonable amount of time, that we should orphan those packages like any others. Only then will Arch Haskell be forced to do something about their lag - or lose maintainership over those packages. I think it's a fair and reasonable solution.
On 10/08/2010 03:15 AM, Loui Chang wrote:
Peter Simons wrote:
the package<http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34179> has been out-of-date for a while, and the maintainers respond neither to e-mail nor to messages left on AUR. Could you please orphan the package? I noticed your request to orphan haskell-numeric-prelude too. Have you contacted Arch Haskell (i.e. Don Stewart) about those packages?
I'm reluctant to orphan packages from the Arch Haskell group because it's an "official" group tasked with managing Haskell packages globally across the repos and the AUR. At the same time, I know that Don is often too busy to deal with issues and that this causes problems for many users because they have to wait for him to get around to running global scripts, which he often postpones for months at a time. I fully understand how frustrating that must be. But the AUR is unofficial. I suggest that if Arch Haskell's packages are out of date for an unreasonable amount of time, that we should orphan
On Thu 07 Oct 2010 20:40 +0200, Xyne wrote: those packages like any others. Only then will Arch Haskell be forced to do something about their lag - or lose maintainership over those packages. I think it's a fair and reasonable solution.
I agree, there should be no exceptions made in the AUR, not for TUs, not for devs, and not for arch-haskell (or anybody else). The same rules should apply to all.
Am 08.10.2010 11:02, schrieb Jakob Gruber:
I agree, there should be no exceptions made in the AUR, not for TUs, not for devs, and not for arch-haskell (or anybody else). The same rules should apply to all.
Dito! Perhaps orphaning such packages puts some pressure on their maintainers. So there could even be some "educational" side effect... vinz.
Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am 08.10.2010 11:02, schrieb Jakob Gruber:
I agree, there should be no exceptions made in the AUR, not for TUs, not for devs, and not for arch-haskell (or anybody else). The same rules should apply to all.
Dito! Perhaps orphaning such packages puts some pressure on their maintainers. So there could even be some "educational" side effect...
vinz.
Actually, Peter's latest angry message seems to have convinced Don to step down, effectively eliminating the Arch Haskell group unless others step up to handle it. Considering the large number of packages (thousands) that he managed to keep up to date with few issues, I personally think this is a considerable loss for the community. People take such contributions for granted and instead of appreciating them they get bitchy when those contributions don't meet all of their expectations. Being 1.5 weeks behind due to life getting in the way is completely understandable. Plus this entire discussion ignores my original question of whether the maintainer had been contacted, as per standard procedure when an orphan request is posted. Past frustrations do not change that. Personally, I would not be very inclined to spend even more of my time rushing an update to help someone who is generally very rude to me, and I doubt that many of you would either. The whole situation is unfortunate.
Hi Xyne,
People take such contributions for granted and instead of appreciating them they get bitchy when those contributions don't meet all of their expectations.
I see why one would perceive the situation that way. My perception, however, is different. Don is a major contributor to the Haskell and ArchLinux community, and nobody in his right mind would ever dispute that. The sheer amount of effort that he put into this project is awe-inspiring, and he certainly deserves all the credit he gets. Notwithstanding that, the packages that were requested to be orphaned are broken -- they don't compile. That is not some abstract, negligible problem. What is the point of having automated build instructions if they don't manage to build the package? Don has realized that he cannot maintain all Haskell packages at AUR on his own -- it's just way too much work for a single person --, and he has decided to bite the bullet and open the project up for other people to contribute. That is good news. There are many people who care about Haskell support in ArchLinux, and I'm sure this project is going to live on. I'm also pretty sure that Don will continue to be a part of that project. We'll find out on the arch-haskell mailing list. Personally, I like your proposal to provide an arch-haskell repo and ABS tree. Take care, Peter
On 8 October 2010 20:51, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Vinzenz Vietzke wrote:
Am 08.10.2010 11:02, schrieb Jakob Gruber:
I agree, there should be no exceptions made in the AUR, not for TUs, not for devs, and not for arch-haskell (or anybody else). The same rules should apply to all.
Dito! Perhaps orphaning such packages puts some pressure on their maintainers. So there could even be some "educational" side effect...
vinz.
Actually, Peter's latest angry message seems to have convinced Don to step down, effectively eliminating the Arch Haskell group unless others step up to handle it.
Considering the large number of packages (thousands) that he managed to keep up to date with few issues, I personally think this is a considerable loss for the community. People take such contributions for granted and instead of appreciating them they get bitchy when those contributions don't meet all of their expectations. Being 1.5 weeks behind due to life getting in the way is completely understandable.
Plus this entire discussion ignores my original question of whether the maintainer had been contacted, as per standard procedure when an orphan request is posted. Past frustrations do not change that. Personally, I would not be very inclined to spend even more of my time rushing an update to help someone who is generally very rude to me, and I doubt that many of you would either.
The whole situation is unfortunate.
I might be a bit too harsh in my post, I think Don did an incredible job. However I still think that Haskell packages should not have an exception for orphaning.
participants (7)
-
Jakob Gruber
-
Loui Chang
-
Lukáš Jirkovský
-
Peter Simons
-
Rémy Oudompheng
-
Vinzenz Vietzke
-
Xyne