[aur-general] TUs adopting packages from the AUR
Guys, When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR. I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it. Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even. Thanks B On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 04:17:36 -0400 aur-general-request@archlinux.org wrote:
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: Delete request (Laurent Carlier) 2. Re: python packages in [community-testing] (Angel Vel?squez) 3. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Xyne) 4. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Sven-Hendrik Haase) 5. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Loui Chang) 6. Re: python packages in [community-testing] (Stefan Husmann) 7. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Stefan Husmann) 8. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Peter Lewis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 00:57:49 +0200 From: Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Delete request To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository \(AUR\)" <aur-general@archlinux.org> Message-ID: <201008140057.49246.lordheavym@gmail.com> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Le samedi 14 ao?t 2010 00:50:06, Simon Stoakley a ?crit :
Hi, can you please delete firefox-tabcandy as it's now landed on trunk so can be got with the FF-nightly pkg Thanks Simon
Done :-)
------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 20:16:30 -0300 From: Angel Vel?squez <angvp@archlinux.com.ve> Subject: Re: [aur-general] python packages in [community-testing] To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" <aur-general@archlinux.org> Message-ID: <AANLkTikXu=d2s8b46eaA_u2hHOE5Bkz9XXqnA_298QhO@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
python-configobj - put in testing for arch=any conversion back in March...
Moved
python-scipy - this is screwy... ?the version in [community-testing] has the same pkgrel-pkgver as that in [community] but they are different packages.
Fixed and moved
Can these be moved/fixed.
Thanks, Allan
On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote:
Guys,
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
Thanks
yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our users to easy access their favorite applications. If you want, then step down and became a TU. -- Ionuț
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:43:37 +0300 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote:
Guys,
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
Thanks
yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our users to easy access their favorite applications.
Is that really how we're supposed to handle it? In my opinion, a TU should contact the current maintainer in advance to discuss moving a package to [community]. Simply taking the package is indeed impolite, regardless of the number of votes. Beside, the threshold (which I thought we had raised to 25 votes) is just a guideline. It's not as though a package must be moved immediately as soon as it has the minimum number of votes. Some packages even end up with several times the minimum number yet remain in the AUR indefinitely (which is a good thing, as an active and interested AUR maintainer is better than a disinterested TU). /Xyne
On 08/14/2010 08:22 PM, Xyne wrote:
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:43:37 +0300 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote:
Guys,
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
Thanks
yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our users to easy access their favorite applications.
Is that really how we're supposed to handle it?
In my opinion, a TU should contact the current maintainer in advance to discuss moving a package to [community]. Simply taking the package is indeed impolite, regardless of the number of votes.
if you read his email, you'll see that an email was sent. if the current maintainer doesn't want to be moved, you think that is a democracy? :D is not -- Ionuț
On Sat 14 Aug 2010 19:22 +0200, Xyne wrote:
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:43:37 +0300 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote:
Guys,
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
Thanks
yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our users to easy access their favorite applications.
Is that really how we're supposed to handle it?
In my opinion, a TU should contact the current maintainer in advance to discuss moving a package to [community]. Simply taking the package is indeed impolite, regardless of the number of votes.
Beside, the threshold (which I thought we had raised to 25 votes) is just a guideline. It's not as though a package must be moved immediately as soon as it has the minimum number of votes. Some packages even end up with several times the minimum number yet remain in the AUR indefinitely (which is a good thing, as an active and interested AUR maintainer is better than a disinterested TU).
The rule is that a package in unsupported must have at least 10 votes before being moved into community without discussion. http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#Rules_for_Pa... There was a big 'so-called' debate about this awhile ago that resulted in one TU quitting.
Am 14.08.2010 20:13, schrieb Loui Chang:
On Sat 14 Aug 2010 19:22 +0200, Xyne wrote:
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:43:37 +0300 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote:
Guys,
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
Thanks
yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our users to easy access their favorite applications.
Is that really how we're supposed to handle it?
In my opinion, a TU should contact the current maintainer in advance to discuss moving a package to [community]. Simply taking the package is indeed impolite, regardless of the number of votes.
Beside, the threshold (which I thought we had raised to 25 votes) is just a guideline. It's not as though a package must be moved immediately as soon as it has the minimum number of votes. Some packages even end up with several times the minimum number yet remain in the AUR indefinitely (which is a good thing, as an active and interested AUR maintainer is better than a disinterested TU).
The rule is that a package in unsupported must have at least 10 votes before being moved into community without discussion.
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#Rules_for_Pa...
There was a big 'so-called' debate about this awhile ago that resulted in one TU quitting.
But there nothing is said about contacting the current maintainer of an AUR package. Maybe we should add that. Regards Stefan
On 14/08/10 21:06, Stefan Husmann wrote:
Am 14.08.2010 20:13, schrieb Loui Chang:
On Sat 14 Aug 2010 19:22 +0200, Xyne wrote:
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:43:37 +0300 Ionuț Bîru wrote:
On 08/14/2010 02:38 PM, Stijn Segers wrote:
Guys,
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
Thanks
yes. this is how we handle it. eventually we have to do that since you or any other contributors can't commit to community and we want all our users to easy access their favorite applications.
Is that really how we're supposed to handle it?
In my opinion, a TU should contact the current maintainer in advance to discuss moving a package to [community]. Simply taking the package is indeed impolite, regardless of the number of votes.
Beside, the threshold (which I thought we had raised to 25 votes) is just a guideline. It's not as though a package must be moved immediately as soon as it has the minimum number of votes. Some packages even end up with several times the minimum number yet remain in the AUR indefinitely (which is a good thing, as an active and interested AUR maintainer is better than a disinterested TU).
The rule is that a package in unsupported must have at least 10 votes before being moved into community without discussion.
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Trusted_User_Guidelines#Rules_for_Pa...
There was a big 'so-called' debate about this awhile ago that resulted in one TU quitting.
But there nothing is said about contacting the current maintainer of an AUR package. Maybe we should add that.
Regards Stefan
-- For what it's worth i think that this should be added, one of my pkgs was added to [community] recently without an email or any disscusion on the ML. An email is just common courtesy really.
On 15 August 2010 04:06, Stefan Husmann <stefan-husmann@t-online.de> wrote:
But there nothing is said about contacting the current maintainer of an AUR package. Maybe we should add that.
Sad story. As the years go by, the AUR is largely becoming a platform for competition - which is far from our intentions. The point of an unsupported repository of buildscripts is to allow mass contribution and _eventual_ promotion of useful and/or popular software packages. If I maintain a package in AUR, it is with the hope that it will someday get adopted by a TU/developer so that our users have direct access to a binary. It is for the betterment of each and every one of us. When I was once maintaining wicd, I was happy to get notified that it would be brought to extra. And that's right, you _should_ get notified, _before_ the process. The obvious medium for that is, of course, the AUR comments section. There is no need for a "reply" - as long as the AUR maintainer does not end up contemplating where her package disappeared to. It is then up to the TU/developer what other level of communication she wants to utilise. If there is no such relay of information, it is simply a case of bad manners. TUs should take this as a good reminder that there's no playing holier-than-thou here. And for the rest of us, remember that maintaining packages is not an exclusive business. -- GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD
On Sat 14 Aug 2010 13:38 +0200, Stijn Segers wrote:
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
If a package has at least 10 votes the package can be moved to community without discussion. TUs are encouraged to communicate with AUR users though, if they're adopting someone else's package.
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Stijn Segers <gotleenucks@gmail.com> wrote:
Guys,
When I saw this discussion about sage-mathematics I was just wondering what is customary when a TU wants to adopt packages that are not his and are maintained by someone in the AUR.
I had a couple of those (remmina-plugins and freerdp) and from one day to another my packages were 'gone' from AUR. Only after that some TU sent me a message that he had taken my packages. There was nothing in the AUR ML about moving it.
Is this how this is usually done? I know developers aren't great communicators, but it sure struck me as impolite, rude even.
Thanks
B
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 04:17:36 -0400 aur-general-request@archlinux.org wrote:
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: Delete request (Laurent Carlier) 2. Re: python packages in [community-testing] (Angel Vel?squez) 3. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Xyne) 4. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Sven-Hendrik Haase) 5. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Loui Chang) 6. Re: python packages in [community-testing] (Stefan Husmann) 7. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Stefan Husmann) 8. Re: Proposal to move sage-mathematics into [community]. (Peter Lewis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 00:57:49 +0200 From: Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Delete request To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository \(AUR\)" <aur-general@archlinux.org> Message-ID: <201008140057.49246.lordheavym@gmail.com> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Le samedi 14 ao?t 2010 00:50:06, Simon Stoakley a ?crit :
Hi, can you please delete firefox-tabcandy as it's now landed on trunk so can be got with the FF-nightly pkg Thanks Simon
Done :-)
------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 20:16:30 -0300 From: Angel Vel?squez <angvp@archlinux.com.ve> Subject: Re: [aur-general] python packages in [community-testing] To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" <aur-general@archlinux.org> Message-ID: <AANLkTikXu=d2s8b46eaA_u2hHOE5Bkz9XXqnA_298QhO@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
python-configobj - put in testing for arch=any conversion back in
March...
Moved
python-scipy - this is screwy... ?the version in [community-testing] has the same pkgrel-pkgver as that in [community] but they are different packages.
Fixed and moved
Can these be moved/fixed.
Thanks, Allan
I agree that TUs should be more verbal about moving packages to community, not only for other people's packages. That said, there should be some automated way of doing this to make it easier for the TUs.
On Sat 14 Aug 2010 07:55 -0500, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I agree that TUs should be more verbal about moving packages to community, not only for other people's packages. That said, there should be some automated way of doing this to make it easier for the TUs.
Well, community and unsupported used to both be under the AUR, and in that case it was more obvious what happened to the packages. What I really think we need is a system kind of like the old AUR that can handle binary and source repos.
On 08/14/2010 03:55 PM, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I agree that TUs should be more verbal about moving packages to community, not only for other people's packages. That said, there should be some automated way of doing this to make it easier for the TUs.
remember when i said that every move should be announced in the list mostly because i wanted to be more open with such inclusions for users and trusted users. -- Ionuț
participants (8)
-
Ionuț Bîru
-
Loui Chang
-
Ray Rashif
-
Simon Stoakley
-
Stefan Husmann
-
Stijn Segers
-
Thomas Dziedzic
-
Xyne