Send aur-general mailing list submissions to
aur-general@archlinux.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
aur-general-request@archlinux.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
aur-general-owner@archlinux.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of aur-general digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Idea for AUR improvement (Hugo Osvaldo Barrera)
2. Re: Idea for AUR improvement (Marcin 'sirmacik' Karpezo)
3. Signoff report for [community-testing] (Arch Website Notification)
4. [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine (Vinycius Maia)
5. Re: [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine (Massimiliano Torromeo)
6. Re: [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine (Vinycius Maia)
7. Re: [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine (Massimiliano Torromeo)
8. clucene to extra / drop lucene? (Andreas Radke)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Hugo Osvaldo Barrera <hugo@osvaldobarrera.com.ar>
To: aur-general@archlinux.org
Cc:
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 12:21:14 -0300
Subject: Re: [aur-general] Idea for AUR improvement
On 2012-06-02 11:55, Xyne wrote:
Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
I think a list of "packages I've contributed to" (similar to "my
packages", but also includes packages you've orphaned) in AUR would
solve this, and be helpful for other stuff.
If a user leaves Arch for some reason, and comes back, IF he's
intereseted in re-adopted his orphaned packages, he'll just see that
list, and adopt them.
Currently, it's pretty hard to know what packages you've contributed to
in the past, and it is something nice to have.
That poses two problems already raised in this thread:
1) privacy issues: not everyone will want to be permanently associated
with
packages
That's why I said "package *I*'ve contributed to"; each user can only
see him own contributions.
2) backend complexity: each package would have to store a list of
contributors
in the database
It's not really that complex. You'd need a new table
("former-maintainer"?) for mapping users<->packages.
1 would not actually be a list of contributors, only a list of current
former maintainers, as those who contribute via comments will not be
and
tracked in
this way. It thus defeats the goal of giving credit, but it would still
work to
track previous maintainers.
Yes, the list would actually be "packages I've maintained".
I lean towards the privacy argument on this and would prefer that we
track every maintainer, but I don't see it as a big deal.
I also think that tracking the last maintainer would be much more useful
don't
than
the submitter. Currently someone could easily adopt orphaned packakges,
insert
malicious code and then orphan them again. A last-maintainer field would
enable
use to determine who did that and deal with it.
Yes, that's exactly the point. I've maintained packages in the past,
and I'm curious as to what happened to them. Since I actually adopted
them (not submited), I've no way of easily listing them.
Now, switching submitter for last maintainer might be easy enough to do
on
the backend.
Yes, it makes much more sense; the last maintainer is way more relevant
than the submitter. Complete rewrites are not uncommon, and the
submiter is irrelevant in those cases.
--
Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marcin 'sirmacik' Karpezo <marcin@karpezo.pl>
To: aur-general@archlinux.org
Cc:
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 20:20:28 +0200
Subject: Re: [aur-general] Idea for AUR improvement
Sorry for top-posting and such a long response time, but I had pretty
rough time and I needed few hours of sleep to get operational again. [;
Thanks for this awesome feedback. I'm really impressed and thankful for
what the original idea turned out to be here.
Such list of packages "I've maintained/contributed to" will completely
be a good solution for a problem described by me and others mentioned
here. I also don't remember all the packages I've maintained and if I
hadn't had old backup on my github I'd ave no way to remember.
If it's not too big trouble to implement it, I'd love to see such list
in AUR.
Thanks guys!
Marcin
On 2012-06-02 11:55, Xyne wrote:
Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
I think a list of "packages I've contributed to" (similar to "my
packages", but also includes packages you've orphaned) in AUR would
solve this, and be helpful for other stuff.
If a user leaves Arch for some reason, and comes back, IF he's
intereseted in re-adopted his orphaned packages, he'll just see that
list, and adopt them.
Currently, it's pretty hard to know what packages you've contributed to
in the past, and it is something nice to have.
That poses two problems already raised in this thread:
1) privacy issues: not everyone will want to be permanently associated
with
packages
That's why I said "package *I*'ve contributed to"; each user can only
see him own contributions.
2) backend complexity: each package would have to store a list of
contributors
in the database
It's not really that complex. You'd need a new table
("former-maintainer"?) for mapping users<->packages.
1 would not actually be a list of contributors, only a list of current
and
former maintainers, as those who contribute via comments will not be
W dniu 02.06.2012 17:21, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera pisze:
tracked in
this way. It thus defeats the goal of giving credit, but it would still
work to
track previous maintainers.
Yes, the list would actually be "packages I've maintained".
I lean towards the privacy argument on this and would prefer that we
don't
track every maintainer, but I don't see it as a big deal.
I also think that tracking the last maintainer would be much more
useful than
the submitter. Currently someone could easily adopt orphaned packakges,
insert
malicious code and then orphan them again. A last-maintainer field
would enable
use to determine who did that and deal with it.
Yes, that's exactly the point. I've maintained packages in the past,
and I'm curious as to what happened to them. Since I actually adopted
them (not submited), I've no way of easily listing them.
Now, switching submitter for last maintainer might be easy enough to do
on
the backend.
Yes, it makes much more sense; the last maintainer is way more relevant
than the submitter. Complete rewrites are not uncommon, and the
submiter is irrelevant in those cases.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Arch Website Notification <nobody@archlinux.org>
To: aur-general@archlinux.org
Cc:
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:07:05 -0000
Subject: [aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 10 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (8 total) ==
* conntrack-tools-1.2.0-1 (i686)
0/2 signoffs
* ndiswrapper-1.57-12 (i686)
0/2 signoffs
* vhba-module-20120422-1 (i686)
0/2 signoffs
* virtualbox-modules-4.1.16-2 (i686)
0/2 signoffs
* conntrack-tools-1.2.0-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* ndiswrapper-1.57-12 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* vhba-module-20120422-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* virtualbox-modules-4.1.16-2 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
== Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (2 total) ==
* libnetfilter_cttimeout-1.0.0-2 (i686)
0/2 signoffs
* libnetfilter_cttimeout-1.0.0-2 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
1. bisson - 5 signoffs
2. stephane - 3 signoffs
3. allan - 3 signoffs
4. tomegun - 2 signoffs
5. pierre - 1 signoffs
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vinycius Maia <suportevg@uol.com.br>
To: <aur-general@archlinux.org>
Cc:
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 07:42:02 -0300
Subject: [aur-general] [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine
Please, rename gtk-thinice-engine to gtk-engine-thinice
I believe it is more appropriate
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Massimiliano Torromeo <massimiliano.torromeo@gmail.com>
To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" <
aur-general@archlinux.org>
Cc:
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 12:54:58 +0200
Subject: Re: [aur-general] [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Vinycius Maia <suportevg@uol.com.br>
wrote:
Please, rename gtk-thinice-engine to gtk-engine-thinice
I believe it is more appropriate
You should upload a new package with the new name and then request a merge
here.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vinycius Maia <suportevg@uol.com.br>
To: Aur General <aur-general@archlinux.org>
Cc:
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 08:03:57 -0300
Subject: Re: [aur-general] [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine
I have sent
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 12:54:58 +0200
From: massimiliano.torromeo@gmail.com
To: aur-general@archlinux.org
Subject: Re: [aur-general] [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Vinycius Maia <suportevg@uol.com.br>
wrote:
Please, rename gtk-thinice-engine to gtk-engine-thinice
I believe it is more appropriate
You should upload a new package with the new name and then request a
merge here.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Massimiliano Torromeo <massimiliano.torromeo@gmail.com>
To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" <
aur-general@archlinux.org>
Cc:
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 13:50:19 +0200
Subject: Re: [aur-general] [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Vinycius Maia <suportevg@uol.com.br>
wrote:
I have sent
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 12:54:58 +0200
From: massimiliano.torromeo@gmail.com
To: aur-general@archlinux.org
Subject: Re: [aur-general] [Rename Request] gtk-thinice-engine
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Vinycius Maia <suportevg@uol.com.br>
wrote:
Please, rename gtk-thinice-engine to gtk-engine-thinice
I believe it is more appropriate
You should upload a new package with the new name and then request a
merge here.
gtk-thinice-engine is gone. Also please post links to the packages
next time. Thanks
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Andreas Radke <andyrtr@archlinux.org>
To: arch-dev-public@archlinux.org
Cc: aur-general@archlinux.org
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 14:18:44 +0200
Subject: [aur-general] clucene to extra / drop lucene?
The upcoming LibreOffice 3.6.x drops the dependency on (java) lucene
2.9.x. We can drop java lucene from our repos if nobody
else wants to take over the maintainership of java lucene in the future.
I'd like to bring in clucene from community and fix a missing feature.
But I'm not familiar with it. So I'd be glad if someone else would pick
it up in extra repo. Anyone going to do this?
-Andy
PS: current build failure with clucene from community:
checking which clucene to use... external
checking for CLUCENE... yes
checking for CLucene/analysis/cjk/CJKAnalyzer.h... no
configure: error: Your version of libclucene has contribs-lib missing.
Error running configure at ./autogen.sh line 187.
_______________________________________________
aur-general mailing list
aur-general@archlinux.org
http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aur-general