I maintain a few PKGBUILDs on AUR, including one that has a considerable amount of votes [1]. It would be awesome to have any package that I maintain moved to [community], it doesn't matter if the TU asked me or not, but this is a personal opinion. Nevertheless, it is certainly polite to write a comment notifying that the TU is going to move the package, not to mention useful, since (I assume that) many people that use a given package would also be notified by e-mail that the package is being moved. Just for the record, I agree that it should be put in the guidelines. I think that the main argument in favor of it is that it is not only polite but convenient for those who want to keep track of the packages one is using. [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=10227 -- Rafael Beraldo http://devio.us/~rberaldo/

2011/2/7 Yaro Kasear :

On Saturday, February 05, 2011 14:49:49 Ángel Velásquez wrote:

...

2011/2/5 Nicky726 :

...

To Angel Velasquez: the nature of the relation is not like an ownership, but more like an authorship. Is it that much to show your respect to the author by a polite question? After all we are people, not mindless machines nor animals.

Hi Nicky,

This is opensource world dude, can you see it?, so forget those "autorship" and "license" of those PKGBUILD, plus, in many cases, many of the packages went from one people to another. Btw I don't know why people refers to packages when we are talking about aurballs containing PKGBUILD, this is different from a package.

They're still packages, whether they contain actual binaries or source code is irrelevent. What do you think tarballs are? The ONLY difference is in how the packages are installed.

As I aurballs and pkgs are different, even for harder you try to seems equals is not the same.

Also, open source does not mean "no credit" or "courtesy free." All he's asking is to be told when the PKGBUILD he is maintaining is taken over and moved to [community]. I personally would enjoy being asked permission first as well.

Forget about permission, a PKGBUILD isn't your daughter and moving to community doesn't mean marry her, so, get off that cloud, I can notice you that I TU or Developer will move your package to community / extra, that's courtesy, but I don't and I won't expect you to give me any kind of authorization, is that clear for you?

...

As Ioni said, he kept the Contributor tag, I don't see the point of whining if your work as a maintainer is recognized on that PKGBUILD but I don't see the point of contributing expecting recognition, we are humans, I know, but what can make you happier than the fact that your work evolved and now you have opportunity to evolve with it too (i.e maintaining new PKGBUILD and then applying to be a TU).

So if you're maintaining a bunch of PKGBUILDs on the AUR and, say, hypothetically, that I, if I were a TU, were to move every single one of your packages effectively to [community] without typing a word to you about it, you won't get mad that suddenly you don't get any consideration? No, names in PKGBUILDs is NOT enough, as many people DO use AUR helpers and never even see the PKGBUILDs they are working with. Also, his point isn't recognition, but COURTESY.

That happened to me and I didn't whine, that works for me when I applied to be a TU, and plus, if you want to be famous doing packages, find other place where the devs get payed, I guess you use pacman or any helper to install your packages and you aren't doing pacman -Qi for every package that you installed for free and I guess you also doesn't send a note of `courtesy` congratulating the maintainer for his work, so WHY if you install stuff without permission (which is the sane thing) why you pretend a Dev or TU should ask you for anything?, many of TU or Devs started like you or the rest (me including), maintaining stuff on AUR then applied to be a TU, and nobody of us pretended to ask for permission, that is beurocracy, what if you don't want to give me the maintainership of a PKGBUILD and I want to put it into binaries repos, users will be affected (downloading sources + compiling) just because you're selfish, and is `YOUR PACKAGE` so hell no, as long we publish the sources of our packages and users can do everything they want with it (add flags, remove patches, etc) we can do the same with the users contributions, we are developers, and users too.

...

We eventually show our respect to the author to notice him that we do will move your package, but it's arrogant and too stupid to pretend that a TU or Dev have to `ask you for permission` <--- THIS IS MADNESS, you aren't the owner of that PKGBUILD ! even if you wrote it from scratch! the next thing after from asking for permission will be "please pay me" .. so hell no.

Why is it madness to show someone courtesy and some consideration for being the maintainer of the PKGBUILD? No, it's madness to be an asshole to the maintainer of the PKGBUILD and not even give thought to TELLING them their package is now in [community].

The madness is to pretend to I as a TU or Dev have to ask your permission, as I said before, a PKGBUILD is not your daughter and I am not asking to marry with, so I don't have to ask you permission for anything, or you've asked devs or tu permission for anything in any moment? As I said, telling him that a package is hitting a binary repo is fine, but forget about permission stuff, right?, Or did you adopted a package and contacted the last maintainer asking his permission?

Whether someone "owns" the PKGBUILD is quite irrelevant. A LOT of maintainers put their heart and soul into making sure those PKGBUILDs actually work on more than their own computers. TUs don't "own" those packages either, and they really should be at least NOTIFYING the maintainer of the acquisition.

Notifying is enough, or you want a special picture of you on the front page?.

So hell yes, there should at least be a notification. If it inconveniences you, then you should not be a TU.

Or you shouldn't use Arch Linux, right? :). Arch is one of the projects which works closely with the community, I invite you to go other communities and see how the opinions of the `mortals` doesn't count for anything :).

...

EOF

Wow, your attitude toward AUR package maintainers makes me wanna put PKGBUILDs on my own site instead of the AUR. There I can DEFINITEY "own" PKGBUILDs if I want to, but further, I'd be able to keep people with your hostile attitude away from my own maintainership. The only downside is my package will not be part of any official repository that way, and who would that help?

AUR PKGBUILDS are not official, do you realize that? or I have to draw you better?, I am AUR package maintainer too, but I have the foots on the ground, and I am not believe special and I don't expect special recognition for my work to the project, many of people that adopted packages that I used to maintain, removed me on the contributor tag, and who cares? as long as I know that I contribute with this project is enough for me, if I would like to contribute expecting recognition or regalies, I surely applied for a canonical or red hat job. Think about it. -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com

2011/2/7 Yaro Kasear :

On Monday, February 07, 2011 12:22:41 Ángel Velásquez wrote:

...

2011/2/7 Yaro Kasear :

...

On Saturday, February 05, 2011 14:49:49 Ángel Velásquez wrote:

...

2011/2/5 Nicky726 :

...

To Angel Velasquez: the nature of the relation is not like an ownership, but more like an authorship. Is it that much to show your respect to the author by a polite question? After all we are people, not mindless machines nor animals.

Hi Nicky,

This is opensource world dude, can you see it?, so forget those "autorship" and "license" of those PKGBUILD, plus, in many cases, many of the packages went from one people to another. Btw I don't know why people refers to packages when we are talking about aurballs containing PKGBUILD, this is different from a package.

They're still packages, whether they contain actual binaries or source code is irrelevent. What do you think tarballs are? The ONLY difference is in how the packages are installed.

As I aurballs and pkgs are different, even for harder you try to seems equals is not the same.

They're not that different. They still result in a package managed by things liek pacman. The only difference is they're built from source. Same goes for anythign in the ABS.

...

...

Also, open source does not mean "no credit" or "courtesy free." All he's asking is to be told when the PKGBUILD he is maintaining is taken over and moved to [community]. I personally would enjoy being asked permission first as well.

Forget about permission, a PKGBUILD isn't your daughter and moving to community doesn't mean marry her, so, get off that cloud, I can notice you that I TU or Developer will move your package to community / extra, that's courtesy, but I don't and I won't expect you to give me any kind of authorization, is that clear for you?

Except your attitude seems to be against any form of courtesy or communication with the community at all. I don't give two shits if you're a TU, if you move my PKGBUILD to [community] without telling me, I *will* be pissed off.

...

...

...

As Ioni said, he kept the Contributor tag, I don't see the point of whining if your work as a maintainer is recognized on that PKGBUILD but I don't see the point of contributing expecting recognition, we are humans, I know, but what can make you happier than the fact that your work evolved and now you have opportunity to evolve with it too (i.e maintaining new PKGBUILD and then applying to be a TU).

So if you're maintaining a bunch of PKGBUILDs on the AUR and, say, hypothetically, that I, if I were a TU, were to move every single one of your packages effectively to [community] without typing a word to you about it, you won't get mad that suddenly you don't get any consideration? No, names in PKGBUILDs is NOT enough, as many people DO use AUR helpers and never even see the PKGBUILDs they are working with. Also, his point isn't recognition, but COURTESY.

That happened to me and I didn't whine, that works for me when I applied to be a TU, and plus, if you want to be famous doing packages, find other place where the devs get payed, I guess you use pacman or any helper to install your packages and you aren't doing pacman -Qi for every package that you installed for free and I guess you also doesn't send a note of `courtesy` congratulating the maintainer for his work, so WHY if you install stuff without permission (which is the sane thing) why you pretend a Dev or TU should ask you for anything?, many of TU or Devs started like you or the rest (me including), maintaining stuff on AUR then applied to be a TU, and nobody of us pretended to ask for permission, that is beurocracy, what if you don't want to give me the maintainership of a PKGBUILD and I want to put it into binaries repos, users will be affected (downloading sources + compiling) just because you're selfish, and is `YOUR PACKAGE` so hell no, as long we publish the sources of our packages and users can do everything they want with it (add flags, remove patches, etc) we can do the same with the users contributions, we are developers, and users too.

Again, you seem to hang on the "fame" thing. That wasn't his point. His point was someone moved his stuff into [commnity] without telling him. Get off the fame thing. He's not arguing for fame, I am not arguing for fame, and you're trying to get off the actual point, which you're not making a good argument against.

...

...

...

We eventually show our respect to the author to notice him that we do will move your package, but it's arrogant and too stupid to pretend that a TU or Dev have to `ask you for permission` <--- THIS IS MADNESS, you aren't the owner of that PKGBUILD ! even if you wrote it from scratch! the next thing after from asking for permission will be "please pay me" .. so hell no.

Why is it madness to show someone courtesy and some consideration for being the maintainer of the PKGBUILD? No, it's madness to be an asshole to the maintainer of the PKGBUILD and not even give thought to TELLING them their package is now in [community].

The madness is to pretend to I as a TU or Dev have to ask your permission, as I said before, a PKGBUILD is not your daughter and I am not asking to marry with, so I don't have to ask you permission for anything, or you've asked devs or tu permission for anything in any moment? As I said, telling him that a package is hitting a binary repo is fine, but forget about permission stuff, right?, Or did you adopted a package and contacted the last maintainer asking his permission?

I said NOTIFICATION, not asking permission. Again, for a TU, you seem to have no clue what AUR maintainers are asking for. At all.

...

...

Whether someone "owns" the PKGBUILD is quite irrelevant. A LOT of maintainers put their heart and soul into making sure those PKGBUILDs actually work on more than their own computers. TUs don't "own" those packages either, and they really should be at least NOTIFYING the maintainer of the acquisition.

Notifying is enough, or you want a special picture of you on the front page?.

Except you made VERY clear on your original post in this thread you don't even see the point in notifying someone, which is what he was asking for.

...

...

So hell yes, there should at least be a notification. If it inconveniences you, then you should not be a TU.

Or you shouldn't use Arch Linux, right? :). Arch is one of the projects which works closely with the community, I invite you to go other communities and see how the opinions of the `mortals` doesn't count for anything :).

Oh, believe me, that was why I left Ubuntu. Its "community" is a bunch of people Canonical put in charge.

...

...

...

EOF

Wow, your attitude toward AUR package maintainers makes me wanna put PKGBUILDs on my own site instead of the AUR. There I can DEFINITEY "own" PKGBUILDs if I want to, but further, I'd be able to keep people with your hostile attitude away from my own maintainership. The only downside is my package will not be part of any official repository that way, and who would that help?

AUR PKGBUILDS are not official, do you realize that? or I have to draw you better?, I am AUR package maintainer too, but I have the foots on the ground, and I am not believe special and I don't expect special recognition for my work to the project, many of people that adopted packages that I used to maintain, removed me on the contributor tag, and who cares? as long as I know that I contribute with this project is enough for me, if I would like to contribute expecting recognition or regalies, I surely applied for a canonical or red hat job.

Official or not, courtesy is still important for a real community, as is communication. And there you go with the fame argument that NOBODY but you are arguing about. Most people in the AUR who are not TUs would certainly like to be TOLD when their package is moved, but you're arguing against that, trying to lord your status as a TU over it. You're acting as bad as the so-called "community leaders" Canonical put all over the Ubuntu "community."

...

Think about it.

I have, and you're makign a bunch of non-arguments for points nobody actually made in this thread.

Ok please somebody bring a toy for the kid. I've repeated on *this* thread (several times) that a `courtesy note` is in the most cases sent when a package is moved to binary form on our official repos, and this should be enough, we aren't forced when we do this, we really write you the note, we put every word on it, I swear I can show you some that I've sent, but you cannot be irritated if I DON'T do it, that's my unique point, but no problem, I don't think I will adopt a package from a guy who is expecting a picture on the aur frontpage like "packager of the year", I swear that if I see that the package belongs of some of the whiners, I will do the package from the scratch :-). Talking about the courtesy, you can't ask for courtesy being harsh, is .. paradogic. And I am not making non-arguments, I am talking about the exigences of you as users to us (developers and trusted users) and the fact that you're getting packages from us, and I don't see notes of courtesy ? or did you sent notes of courtesy to one of our devs?, now we feel emo 'cause you the users uses our packages and we don't receive at least a note of courtesy, this is ridiculous as your request. -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com

Angel, If AUR is a sucessgul project, it is not because of this kind of language you use. Be friendly to your fellow Arch friends. I'm sure that if the other TU would share this language, another project similar to AUR would pop up elsewhere.

On 8 February 2011 03:23, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:

Side note: Although TUs are a great bunch, I don't think that's the main reason why people use the AUR. :)

As much as I'd like for this thread to die, because the main issue was settled very many replies ago (we all agree that it's bad and we'll make sure it doesn't happen again), I'd also like to stress the fact that often times discussions veer off-topic and change in tone due to a cultural and language barrier. So, chill out :)

On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 17:57 +0100, Alexander Rødseth wrote:

I would like to add that for some AUR-users, the packages is what they would have to show for if they were to apply to become a TU. As far as I know, the AUR history is not recorded in any accessible way.

- Alexander (trontonic on AUR / xyproto on #archlinux)

This is a good point, but I'd assume the users in question would have their latest copy of the PKGBUILD on their machine if they wanted to use it in applying. Their name would also be on the PKGBUILD in [community] in any case.

2011/2/9 Peter Lewis

Two very good points. In that case we should be very clear that if a package is moved up the repo ranking or otherwise adopted, that all contributors' names remain on there as a matter of policy (is it already?) I don't believe anyone has a right to remove a contributor's name unless they also remove the code they contributed. Given that it's unlikely that they know exactly what this is, the only case for this is a total rewrite.

Well this really all depends on the license. But out of courtesy I don't think it is appropriate to remove the names of contributors. --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/