[aur-general] [aur general] Seeking the TU wisdom
Ok, I have a bit of a problem with a pair of packages, puppet and facter. As it stands the puppet package in the aur is broken, it builds but it does not run properly. The puppet package in the AUR is configured to run on ruby 1.9, puppet does not run properly on ruby 1.9 yet, and the pacman plugin for puppet that is supplied with the package no longer works properly. The package has also been out of date for a few weeks. I have contacted the maintainer and I was promised that my fixes would be applied, but they were not, so I made a duplicate, puppet-ruby1.8 and facter-ruby1.8, I am using these packages in production and they work very well. I even open up a github account, forked Miah's puppet package, applied the changes and requested a pull as requested. But the package remains out of date and broken, so my question is this, does this constitute grounds for having a TU orphan the packages so I can update them, make them work, and get rid of my duplicates? Or should I continue more diplomatically? -Tom Hatch
Thomas S Hatch wrote:
Ok, I have a bit of a problem with a pair of packages, puppet and facter.
As it stands the puppet package in the aur is broken, it builds but it does not run properly. The puppet package in the AUR is configured to run on ruby 1.9, puppet does not run properly on ruby 1.9 yet, and the pacman plugin for puppet that is supplied with the package no longer works properly. The package has also been out of date for a few weeks.
I have contacted the maintainer and I was promised that my fixes would be applied, but they were not, so I made a duplicate, puppet-ruby1.8 and facter-ruby1.8, I am using these packages in production and they work very well.
I even open up a github account, forked Miah's puppet package, applied the changes and requested a pull as requested.
But the package remains out of date and broken, so my question is this, does this constitute grounds for having a TU orphan the packages so I can update them, make them work, and get rid of my duplicates? Or should I continue more diplomatically?
-Tom Hatch
According to the comments on the page, you first brought up the merger about a month and a half ago, so even if the maintainer is busy irl as mentioned in his|her last post, there has been plenty of time to fix the package. I've orphaned puppet for now. Facter is neither flagged as out-of-date nor are there any comments regarding the issue on the page. Is there anything wrong with the facter package? Regards, Xyne p.s. Please provide links next time.
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Thomas S Hatch wrote:
Ok, I have a bit of a problem with a pair of packages, puppet and facter.
As it stands the puppet package in the aur is broken, it builds but it does not run properly. The puppet package in the AUR is configured to run on ruby 1.9, puppet does not run properly on ruby 1.9 yet, and the pacman plugin for puppet that is supplied with the package no longer works properly. The package has also been out of date for a few weeks.
I have contacted the maintainer and I was promised that my fixes would be applied, but they were not, so I made a duplicate, puppet-ruby1.8 and facter-ruby1.8, I am using these packages in production and they work very well.
I even open up a github account, forked Miah's puppet package, applied the changes and requested a pull as requested.
But the package remains out of date and broken, so my question is this, does this constitute grounds for having a TU orphan the packages so I can update them, make them work, and get rid of my duplicates? Or should I continue more diplomatically?
-Tom Hatch
According to the comments on the page, you first brought up the merger about a month and a half ago, so even if the maintainer is busy irl as mentioned in his|her last post, there has been plenty of time to fix the package.
I've orphaned puppet for now. Facter is neither flagged as out-of-date nor are there any comments regarding the issue on the page. Is there anything wrong with the facter package?
Regards, Xyne
p.s. Please provide links next time.
Yes, the facter package should also be based on ruby 1.8 and throws many errors https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=15495 We have communicated about this package as well, they are a closely related pair, if I change the puppet package then it will be broken without also changing the facter package Thanks Xyne
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com> wrote:
We have communicated about this package as well, they are a closely related pair, if I change the puppet package then it will be broken without also changing the facter package
Did this communication take place a good time ago, or more recently? Regards, Brad
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Brad Fanella <bradfanella@archlinux.us>wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com> wrote:
We have communicated about this package as well, they are a closely
related
pair, if I change the puppet package then it will be broken without also changing the facter package
Did this communication take place a good time ago, or more recently?
Regards, Brad
The first communication occurred over 2 months ago, the more recent communications about pulling in changes to fix the packages occurred about 2 weeks ago. Fixes were communicated over a month ago. -Tom
On Jan 6, 2011, at 6:09 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Brad Fanella <bradfanella@archlinux.us>wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com> wrote:
We have communicated about this package as well, they are a closely
related
pair, if I change the puppet package then it will be broken without also changing the facter package
Did this communication take place a good time ago, or more recently?
Regards, Brad
The first communication occurred over 2 months ago, the more recent communications about pulling in changes to fix the packages occurred about 2 weeks ago.
Fixes were communicated over a month ago.
-Tom
In that case, I have orphaned the facter package as well. Take care, Brad
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Brad Fanella <bradfanella@archlinux.us>wrote:
On Jan 6, 2011, at 6:09 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Brad Fanella <bradfanella@archlinux.us
wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com>
wrote:
We have communicated about this package as well, they are a closely
related
pair, if I change the puppet package then it will be broken without also changing the facter package
Did this communication take place a good time ago, or more recently?
Regards, Brad
The first communication occurred over 2 months ago, the more recent communications about pulling in changes to fix the packages occurred about 2 weeks ago.
Fixes were communicated over a month ago.
-Tom
In that case, I have orphaned the facter package as well.
Take care, Brad
Thanks Brad, I will have these working in no time. -Tom
Brad Fanella wrote:
In that case, I have orphaned the facter package as well.
Nice teamwork... we just orphaned the **** out of those packages. *chest bump* (I don't know why, but that was my first reaction to reading your post. I tried to find an image or video to show what I had in mind but failed. The closest thing I could find was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNveTeErWe8 but that doesn't really convey it. I must be tired.) Thomas S Hatch wrote:
Thanks Brad, I will have these working in no time.
Should the *-ruby1.8 variants be removed?
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Brad Fanella wrote:
In that case, I have orphaned the facter package as well.
Nice teamwork... we just orphaned the **** out of those packages. *chest bump*
(I don't know why, but that was my first reaction to reading your post. I tried to find an image or video to show what I had in mind but failed. The closest thing I could find was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNveTeErWe8 but that doesn't really convey it.
I must be tired.)
Thomas S Hatch wrote:
Thanks Brad, I will have these working in no time.
Should the *-ruby1.8 variants be removed?
Nice, I agree! Yes they should, give me a minute to updated the ones that just got orphaned -Tom
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Thomas S Hatch <thatch45@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Brad Fanella wrote:
In that case, I have orphaned the facter package as well.
Nice teamwork... we just orphaned the **** out of those packages. *chest bump*
(I don't know why, but that was my first reaction to reading your post. I tried to find an image or video to show what I had in mind but failed. The closest thing I could find was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNveTeErWe8 but that doesn't really convey it.
I must be tired.)
Thomas S Hatch wrote:
Thanks Brad, I will have these working in no time.
Should the *-ruby1.8 variants be removed?
Nice, I agree!
Yes they should, give me a minute to updated the ones that just got orphaned
-Tom
Yes, can you purge the AUR of three packages: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29731 no longer needed by pupped, replaced by ruby-shadow (it didn't build anyway) puppet-ruby1.8 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42650 and facter-ruby1.8 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42651 Thanks guys *chest bump* -Tom
Thomas S Hatch wrote:
Yes, can you purge the AUR of three packages:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29731 no longer needed by pupped, replaced by ruby-shadow (it didn't build anyway)
puppet-ruby1.8 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42650
and facter-ruby1.8 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42651
Thanks guys *chest bump*
-Tom
done, thanks
On 01/07/11 at 01:59am, Xyne wrote:
Brad Fanella wrote:
In that case, I have orphaned the facter package as well.
Nice teamwork... we just orphaned the **** out of those packages. *chest bump*
(I don't know why, but that was my first reaction to reading your post. I tried to find an image or video to show what I had in mind but failed. The closest thing I could find was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNveTeErWe8 but that doesn't really convey it.
I must be tired.)
/me sees the xyne/Brad chest bump as much like ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FNM8bRymSw
participants (4)
-
Brad Fanella
-
J. W. Birdsong
-
Thomas S Hatch
-
Xyne