Not much traffic on the wiki page until now! Do we have at least any unofficial date to finish this thing? Not that it stays this way for one month or so ...
Cheers Jaro
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:51:24PM +0200, Allan McRae wrote:
HI TUs,
The call for people to list packages in the AUR to cleanup has been quite successful with around 100 packages recommended. See the wiki page: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_CleanUp_Day
Now we have to go through the list and confirm which packages deserve to be deleted. Remember not to get carried away here. We don't want to delete work that may still be useful.
[snip]
If you have a disagreement with another TUs decision, move it to a new section call "further discussion" or something. If the suggestions are checked properly before moving the the remove or keep list, then this shouldn't happen but we will deal with it if it happens.
I will go through and make the removals in a few days.
Cheers, Allan
Dragonlord wrote:
Not much traffic on the wiki page until now! Do we have at least any unofficial date to finish this thing? Not that it stays this way for one month or so ...
I will do the removals this weekend so that is the unofficial date...
All TUs should go to the wiki page (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_CleanUp_Day) and see if they can move any packages from the suggestion list to the TU signoff list. It doesn't take much. For example, there are packages to do with pidgin, blender, and gimp that have apparently be merged upstream. If you use those, check that you agree with the comment and move the package to the correct section. I expect everyone who said +1 good idea to do something!
Allan
Could we rename mplayer-w32codecs to something like codecs-extras? Since this package provides more codecs i think we should keep him.
Hugo Doria wrote:
Could we rename mplayer-w32codecs to something like codecs-extras? Since this package provides more codecs i think we should keep him.
Good idea. It should probably only provide the extra files not already in the codecs package. Added note to wiki that I will follow up with the maintainer later (unless you want to...)
Allan
Allan McRae wrote:
All TUs should go to the wiki page (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_CleanUp_Day) and see if they can move any packages from the suggestion list to the TU signoff list. It doesn't take much. For example, there are packages to do with pidgin, blender, and gimp that have apparently be merged upstream. If you use those, check that you agree with the comment and move the package to the correct section. I expect everyone who said +1 good idea to do something!
Well, I count a total of three TU's other than me who did anything about this. Thanks to those TUs.
I am going through this list when I have time but I still need some help. Can TUs in the know please help me with the following packages which I am unfamiliar with:
gnuserv - is it depreciated with emacs 22+? ionice - anyone confirm it is part of util-linux-ng now? kernel26thinkpad - obsolete? org - included in emacs 22+?
librtorrent - package in community? rs_rtorrent - package in community?
And of course, feel free to move any other packages into the sorted list...
Cheers, Allan
On 5/27/08, Allan McRae mcrae_allan@hotmail.com wrote:
Allan McRae wrote:
librtorrent - package in community? rs_rtorrent - package in community?
And of course, feel free to move any other packages into the sorted list...
Cheers, Allan
I just moved librtorrent to the to be removed section minutes before I saw your mail. I will move rs_rtorrent to that same section too now, as it is indeed already in community. Both are owned by codemac.
librtorrent: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?do_Details=1&ID=9459 rs_torrent: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?do_Details=1&ID=8720
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Allan McRae mcrae_allan@hotmail.com wrote:
librtorrent - package in community? rs_rtorrent - package in community?
First comment on AUR : Current version of rakshasa`s libTorrrent library modifyied not to conflict with rb_libtorrent.
from http://libtorrent.rakshasa.no/ : <<Disclaimer : This is not the same libtorrent project as the one found on SourceForge. >> Also this : http://libtorrent.rakshasa.no/ticket/854
rasterbar project is there : http://www.rasterbar.com/products/libtorrent/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/libtorrent
That situation is so stupid but how to deal with it? Personally, I use only rtorrent + libtorrent which are great, and I like to use them as distributed by upstream, without ugly hacks for renaming libtorrent to librtorrent. On the other hand, rakshasa libtorrent is apparently only used by rtorrent, while rasterbar libtorrent is used by many clients : http://www.rasterbar.com/products/libtorrent/projects.html
So if you want to use both in the same time, it makes more sense to rename rakshasa one.
However, Arch is supposed to follow upstream, so Arch should consider this is not its issue and let upstreams resolve it. In the meantime (forever?), the users simply have to make their mind between both. No need to have a thousand torrent clients installed in the same time.
kernel26thinkpad could be removed. I moved him to the to "packages to remove" list.
I added a comment to mplayer-w32codecs package. It would be better if we could rename it to "codecs-extra" as suggested before.
openarena could be kept since some servers still runs the older version.
I also moved some other packages.
2008/5/27 Hugo Doria hugodoria@gmail.com:
kernel26thinkpad could be removed. I moved him to the to "packages to remove" list.
I added a comment to mplayer-w32codecs package. It would be better if we could rename it to "codecs-extra" as suggested before.
openarena could be kept since some servers still runs the older version.
I also moved some other packages.
-- Hugo Doria http://hdoria.archlinux-br.org
[lukas@red_dragon ~]$ pacman -Qo `which ionice` /usr/bin/ionice is owned by util-linux-ng 2.13.0.1-2
If you have recent Arch, you should will it same.
Hi all,
I have done most of the cleanup of the suggested packages in the AUR. I have tarballs for all deleted packages so any complaints can be pointed my way. I also orphaned any package that was decided to be kept but was suggested because of how out-of-date it was.
There is still ~20 packages that need sorted but I don't know much about those (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_CleanUp_Day). Please give these a quick look over and sort any you can.
Three packages in community have been flagged for deletion. I agree with all suggestions so I will remove them later in the week if I hear no objections. The packages are (with maintainer in brackets): * ion-modules - ion3 is not part of official repos anymore (sergej) - move to AUR * lmctl - gets replaced by lomoco which is in community (codemac) - delete * wildfire - renamed openfire (phrakture) - delete
Allan
On Sun, 1 Jun 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
Hi all,
I have done most of the cleanup of the suggested packages in the AUR. I have tarballs for all deleted packages so any complaints can be pointed my way. I also orphaned any package that was decided to be kept but was suggested because of how out-of-date it was.
There is still ~20 packages that need sorted but I don't know much about those (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_CleanUp_Day). Please give these a quick look over and sort any you can.
Three packages in community have been flagged for deletion. I agree with all suggestions so I will remove them later in the week if I hear no objections. The packages are (with maintainer in brackets):
- ion-modules - ion3 is not part of official repos anymore (sergej) - move
to AUR
- lmctl - gets replaced by lomoco which is in community (codemac) - delete
- wildfire - renamed openfire (phrakture) - delete
Allan
You can remove sonic-rainbow.
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org