Based on the loosely defined "cleanup criteria"[], we're overdue for a little purge. The candidates can be found here:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=nd&K=&outdated=on&am... https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=250&SeB=nd&outdated=on&SB=...
Please run `aurphan -a` to see if you have any orphaned AUR packages installed, and do everyone a favor by adopting them.
If there are no objections, it will be done this weekend. A reply will be sent for record-keeping with the list of packages prior to deletion.
[]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:AUR_Cleanup_Day#Possible_...
-- Best, polyzen
On 22/1/19 1:16 pm, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
Based on the loosely defined "cleanup criteria"[], we're overdue for a little purge. The candidates can be found here:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=nd&K=&outdated=on&am... https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=250&SeB=nd&outdated=on&SB=...
Please run `aurphan -a` to see if you have any orphaned AUR packages installed, and do everyone a favor by adopting them.
If there are no objections, it will be done this weekend. A reply will be sent for record-keeping with the list of packages prior to deletion.
-- Best, polyzen
I'm not sure if I did something wrong?
I adopted mingw-w64-freeimage (My first one)
I cloned the git and followed the instructions to edit and commit the updated PKGBUILD.
All appeared good.
Then I realized that I needed to delete the gcc5.patch.
When I tried to commit that change al I got was a 403 error?
Did I do something wrong or is the package on hold until checked bu a TU?
Thanks
Macca
On 22/1/19 2:18 pm, hagar wrote:
On 22/1/19 1:16 pm, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
Based on the loosely defined "cleanup criteria"[], we're overdue for a little purge. The candidates can be found here:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=nd&K=&outdated=on&am...
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=250&SeB=nd&outdated=on&SB=...
Please run `aurphan -a` to see if you have any orphaned AUR packages installed, and do everyone a favor by adopting them.
If there are no objections, it will be done this weekend. A reply will be sent for record-keeping with the list of packages prior to deletion.
-- Best, polyzen
I'm not sure if I did something wrong?
I adopted mingw-w64-freeimage (My first one)
I cloned the git and followed the instructions to edit and commit the updated PKGBUILD.
All appeared good.
Then I realized that I needed to delete the gcc5.patch.
When I tried to commit that change al I got was a 403 error?
Did I do something wrong or is the package on hold until checked bu a TU?
Thanks
Macca
Sorry, Never mind.
My instructions missed the step to edit the .git/config and change the url.
Thanks
Macca
Not too long after I became TU I deleted something of ~2000 packages, based on similar "criteria" and after seeing no "objections" on IRC after a while. After the deed was done I got emails, angry shouting on IRC and complaints for the following 6 months on BBS and other places.
If you want to make the same mistake as me, you're welcome to. I'll gladly console you afterward with an "I told you so".
tl;dr use requests like everyone else, or patch aurweb to have "batch requests"
On 2019-01-26 08:01:46 (+0100), Alad Wenter via aur-general wrote:
Not too long after I became TU I deleted something of ~2000 packages, based on similar "criteria" and after seeing no "objections" on IRC after a while. After the deed was done I got emails, angry shouting on IRC and complaints for the following 6 months on BBS and other places.
"they took our packages" *rantyface* *screaming*
tl;dr use requests like everyone else, or patch aurweb to have "batch requests"
Yes, please requests! This way stuff at least gets to the mailing list and is somewhat documented.
Quoting David Runge (2019-01-26 05:23:37)
On 2019-01-26 08:01:46 (+0100), Alad Wenter via aur-general wrote:
Not too long after I became TU I deleted something of ~2000 packages, based on similar "criteria" and after seeing no "objections" on IRC after a while. After the deed was done I got emails, angry shouting on IRC and complaints for the following 6 months on BBS and other places.
"they took our packages" *rantyface* *screaming*
tl;dr use requests like everyone else, or patch aurweb to have "batch requests"
Yes, please requests! This way stuff at least gets to the mailing list and is somewhat documented.
Thank you for your level-headed responses. More to add to my long list of aurweb patch ideas.
I wonder if Johannes' "Make delete and merge links create an auto-accepted request" patch[] being deployed would be sufficient. I readily accept requests for this criteria, but couldn't imagine manually accepting almost 500 of them with the current setup.
https://patchwork.archlinux.org/patch/911/
-- Best, polyzen
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 08:50:48PM -0500, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
Quoting David Runge (2019-01-26 05:23:37)
On 2019-01-26 08:01:46 (+0100), Alad Wenter via aur-general wrote:
Not too long after I became TU I deleted something of ~2000 packages, based on similar "criteria" and after seeing no "objections" on IRC after a while. After the deed was done I got emails, angry shouting on IRC and complaints for the following 6 months on BBS and other places.
"they took our packages" *rantyface* *screaming*
tl;dr use requests like everyone else, or patch aurweb to have "batch requests"
Yes, please requests! This way stuff at least gets to the mailing list and is somewhat documented.
Thank you for your level-headed responses. More to add to my long list of aurweb patch ideas.
I wonder if Johannes' "Make delete and merge links create an auto-accepted request" patch[] being deployed would be sufficient. I readily accept requests for this criteria, but couldn't imagine manually accepting almost 500 of them with the current setup.
That's exactly the issue. It's not because you or I might accept these criteria (and corresponding requests) as valid, that everyone else does. e.g.
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-requests/2017-November/020347.html
As to the patch linked, I don't see how it's relevant to this discussion. The "paper trail" from such a mass deletion wouldn't include a reason for said deletion, nor a chance for people to oppose deletion of specific packages.
Alad
-- Best, polyzen
On 1/22/19 12:16 AM, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
Based on the loosely defined "cleanup criteria"[], we're overdue for a little purge. The candidates can be found here:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=nd&K=&outdated=on&am... https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=250&SeB=nd&outdated=on&SB=...
Please run `aurphan -a` to see if you have any orphaned AUR packages installed, and do everyone a favor by adopting them.
If there are no objections, it will be done this weekend. A reply will be sent for record-keeping with the list of packages prior to deletion.
In addition to Alad's point about how he once did the same thing and it did *not* turn out well, I simply don't fathom how you even read what you did in the AUR Cleanup Day wikipage.
You are darn right those are loosely defined -- those rules could be interpreted so loosely as to delete practically any package ever. Hence why that page actually has nothing to do with making up excuses for some TU to unilaterally purge random packages en masse.
The page is as it self-describes, a page discussing how to hold the semi-regular experience of users looking for old and unmaintained packages and submitting waves of deletion requests.
If you would like to do an Alad, please justify it on the grounds that you yourself want to and decided to do so -- don't try to pretend that "the Wiki told me to". Because no, the Wiki did not tell you to delete huge numbers of packages without warning, review, or a chance to let the people who use the packages appeal the decision on a per-package level.
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 07:04:28PM -0500, Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR) wrote:
On 1/22/19 12:16 AM, Daniel M. Capella via aur-general wrote:
Based on the loosely defined "cleanup criteria"[], we're overdue for a little purge. The candidates can be found here:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=nd&K=&outdated=on&am... https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=250&SeB=nd&outdated=on&SB=...
Please run `aurphan -a` to see if you have any orphaned AUR packages installed, and do everyone a favor by adopting them.
If there are no objections, it will be done this weekend. A reply will be sent for record-keeping with the list of packages prior to deletion.
In addition to Alad's point about how he once did the same thing and it did *not* turn out well, I simply don't fathom how you even read what you did in the AUR Cleanup Day wikipage.
You are darn right those are loosely defined -- those rules could be interpreted so loosely as to delete practically any package ever. Hence why that page actually has nothing to do with making up excuses for some TU to unilaterally purge random packages en masse.
The page is as it self-describes, a page discussing how to hold the semi-regular experience of users looking for old and unmaintained packages and submitting waves of deletion requests.
If you would like to do an Alad, please justify it on the grounds that you yourself want to and decided to do so -- don't try to pretend that "the Wiki told me to". Because no, the Wiki did not tell you to delete huge numbers of packages without warning, review, or a chance to let the people who use the packages appeal the decision on a per-package level.
-- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
I don't understand why we should delete orphaned packages in the AUR at all. They are not harmful (like blowing up our repository like it would do in community) nor are they unused only because they are orphaned.
I prefer having a big archive of orphaned packages with the chance that somebody adopts the package and finds a PKGBUILD as base to work on. Or are there some problems I am missing? like for example disk space on our AUR server?
best regards, chris
On 1/27/19 1:20 PM, Christian Rebischke via aur-general wrote:
I don't understand why we should delete orphaned packages in the AUR at all. They are not harmful (like blowing up our repository like it would do in community) nor are they unused only because they are orphaned.
I prefer having a big archive of orphaned packages with the chance that somebody adopts the package and finds a PKGBUILD as base to work on.
Completely agree
On 1/27/19 7:20 AM, Christian Rebischke via aur-general wrote: [...]
nor are they unused only because they are orphaned.
I prefer having a big archive of orphaned packages with the chance that somebody adopts the package and finds a PKGBUILD as base to work on.
I agree.
Or are there some problems I am missing? like for example disk space on our AUR server?
But this cannot be it, if only because deleting packages does not gain us disk space. The AUR takes up 1.8 GB with all the packages it contains, and deleting packages does not delete any content, it merely delists it and drops the data from the mysql database (I'm unsure how much space that takes up, but most likely less even than a series of revisions in a git repository).
aur-general@lists.archlinux.org