On Tue, 20 May 2008, Loui wrote:

Is it still possible to upload a new PKGBUILD without uploading a new binary package so that ABS users get the good stuff? That might be handy.

Yes, it's possible. Just tag and commit the PKGBUILD in cvs. Details are in the wiki articles linked from AUR home page. However, if you do that, don't change the pkgrel otherwise you'll break the community db with the well known "missing package" error. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

On Tue, 20 May 2008 20:56:48 +0200 BaSh wrote:

Hi, 2008/5/20 Allan McRae : [cut] Please see the list of packages without license(), some of these require fix for gcc4.3 and maybe can be moved to unsupported because are unmaintained.

You could made a new list about it. And, sorry, in my point of view bumping pkgrel and upload a package is necessary when we're doing an important modification like changing / adding licenses. Is there anyone of us that could set-up a temporary building machine? On the point that who upload packages without a license isn't a good TU, I'm with you. -- JJDaNiMoTh - ArchLinux Trusted User

On the point that who upload packages without a license isn't a good TU, I'm with you.

-- JJDaNiMoTh - ArchLinux Trusted User

yes I'm a bit disappointed too. Almost two months have passed since I wrote the script and created the initial list, though very little did happen until BaSh started to add the licenses (thanks for that btw). I originally created the list though, so that each and every TU who has packages in that list could fix his own packages. For the ones who did fix their own packages or have a legitimate reason no to do so that's okay, but I really have to say for all other TUs, licenses are important. The field is there for a reason so please use it. If you don't have time to fix things yourself, send a mail to aur-general and ask someone with more time to do so. I hope that is not too much to ask? (I hope I don't sound too angry because I'm not, I just want you all to take my point :p) Thank you.

2008/5/20 BaSh :

2008/5/20 Ronald van Haren :

...

yes I'm a bit disappointed too. Almost two months have passed since I [cut] Thus yesterday I started to fix the PKGBUILDs and today I finished to do it. I fixed maybe 30~35 packages (more are maintained by dtw).

dtw is a TU or not? If not, we could move some packages to unsupported; if yes, it's time to call a removing vote.

2008/5/21 DaNiMoTh :

dtw is a TU or not?

If not, we could move some packages to unsupported; if yes, it's time to call a removing vote. I think isn't necessary move dtw's packages to unsupported, there are 2 new TU (gcarrier, Drag0nlord) and they can adopt dtw's packages.

I'm agree to start removal vote. Regards -- Andrea `BaSh` Scarpino Arch Linux Trusted User Linux User: #430842

2008/5/21 Roman Kyrylych :

Hehe, you cannot start a removal voting, because dtw is not a TU since he resigned after becoming a dev. ;-) (that was on 6th of July, 2007).

He still has some packages in community (last time he given out some of them) (some of which I was going to maintain, but became unable to do this... :-()

So, I'd say that people who want to take his packages contact him personally, so this just wouldn't become a surprise for him.

-- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

Did anyone contact me personally? I was surprised! Full marks for enthusiasm, guys and gals, and thank you for keeping "my" pkgs up to date. I say "my" because one thing I always disliked about this pkg maintenance business was the sense of ownership and I had hoped after my absence I would not feel so attached to "my" pkgs but I do! I miss you geany! *sob* However, I'm not asking for any of them "back" but if it's more convenient for my remaining pkgs (i.e. deps) I might contact people about readopting some of them. I also might move some of the more mature and popular pkgs to [extra] depending on the situation there. Cheers and thanks again dtw

On Wed, 21 May 2008 06:02:44 +1000 Allan McRae wrote:

BaSh wrote: [cut] Note it is much better if the actual maintainer fixes their own packages

This is right.

because you know they are going to work from their local copy (without this change) when they update the package again...

A cvs update is the best thing to do before any modifications, because if you work on pkgbuild outdated you can't upload it. -- JJDaNiMoTh - ArchLinux Trusted User