[PRQ#43800] Merge Request for lua51-moonscript
KokaKiwi [1] filed a request to merge lua51-moonscript [2] into lua- moonscript [3]: lua51-moonscript can be handled by the lua-moonscript AUR package (just need to toggle a comment) [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/KokaKiwi/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua51-moonscript/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua-moonscript/
-1 for merge. Custom-editing PKGBUILDs of AUR packages is not something users should regularly do. If they are compelled to turn to such measures, that means either there is a packaging error, or there needs to be a different variant of that package. Like in this case: A separate moonscript package for main lua dependency, another one for lua51. Let's keep both packages as they are. This is not Gentoo where you can parameterize the build of the same package source via USE flags. On 7 July 2023 10:56:45 GMT+02:00, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
KokaKiwi [1] filed a request to merge lua51-moonscript [2] into lua- moonscript [3]:
lua51-moonscript can be handled by the lua-moonscript AUR package (just need to toggle a comment)
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/KokaKiwi/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua51-moonscript/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua-moonscript/
U-turn: +1 for the merge. @KokaKiwi, sorry, I didn't know you were the maintainer of the target package, lua-moonscript. You also didn't say the latter is a split package for different Lua versions. I infer you intend to add a lua51-specific subpackage there. Now I see that is the right approach. Also the old source package lua51-moonscript is an outdated orphan. On 7 July 2023 14:56:25 GMT+02:00, Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros@runbox.eu> wrote:
-1 for merge.
Custom-editing PKGBUILDs of AUR packages is not something users should regularly do.
If they are compelled to turn to such measures, that means either there is a packaging error, or there needs to be a different variant of that package.
Like in this case: A separate moonscript package for main lua dependency, another one for lua51.
Let's keep both packages as they are.
This is not Gentoo where you can parameterize the build of the same package source via USE flags.
On 7 July 2023 10:56:45 GMT+02:00, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
KokaKiwi [1] filed a request to merge lua51-moonscript [2] into lua- moonscript [3]:
lua51-moonscript can be handled by the lua-moonscript AUR package (just need to toggle a comment)
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/KokaKiwi/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua51-moonscript/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua-moonscript/
Hi, Yeah sorry for the lack of context in my merge request (the input box in the AUR UI is kinda small so i thought it was meant to be kinda concise too)
I infer you intend to add a lua51-specific subpackage there.
Yep, that's what i meant about the "toggle a comment thing", since i had to comment the `lua51-moonscript` line in my PKGBUILD because of the already existing package (which make the git-push fails)
Also the old source package lua51-moonscript is an outdated orphan.
I initially thought about adopting the package but then i remembered i already maintain the `lua-*` package already :) On 07/07/2023 15:02, Marcell Mészáros wrote:
U-turn: +1 for the merge.
@KokaKiwi, sorry, I didn't know you were the maintainer of the target package, lua-moonscript.
You also didn't say the latter is a split package for different Lua versions. I infer you intend to add a lua51-specific subpackage there.
Now I see that is the right approach.
Also the old source package lua51-moonscript is an outdated orphan.
On 7 July 2023 14:56:25 GMT+02:00, Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros@runbox.eu> wrote:
-1 for merge.
Custom-editing PKGBUILDs of AUR packages is not something users should regularly do.
If they are compelled to turn to such measures, that means either there is a packaging error, or there needs to be a different variant of that package.
Like in this case: A separate moonscript package for main lua dependency, another one for lua51.
Let's keep both packages as they are.
This is not Gentoo where you can parameterize the build of the same package source via USE flags.
On 7 July 2023 10:56:45 GMT+02:00, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
KokaKiwi [1] filed a request to merge lua51-moonscript [2] into lua- moonscript [3]:
lua51-moonscript can be handled by the lua-moonscript AUR package (just need to toggle a comment)
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/KokaKiwi/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua51-moonscript/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua-moonscript/
+1, go ahead with the merge. :) On 7 July 2023 15:17:31 GMT+02:00, KokaKiwi <kokakiwi+aur@kokakiwi.net> wrote:
Hi,
Yeah sorry for the lack of context in my merge request (the input box in the AUR UI is kinda small so i thought it was meant to be kinda concise too)
I infer you intend to add a lua51-specific subpackage there.
Yep, that's what i meant about the "toggle a comment thing", since i had to comment the `lua51-moonscript` line in my PKGBUILD because of the already existing package (which make the git-push fails)
Also the old source package lua51-moonscript is an outdated orphan.
I initially thought about adopting the package but then i remembered i already maintain the `lua-*` package already :)
On 07/07/2023 15:02, Marcell Mészáros wrote:
U-turn: +1 for the merge.
@KokaKiwi, sorry, I didn't know you were the maintainer of the target package, lua-moonscript.
You also didn't say the latter is a split package for different Lua versions. I infer you intend to add a lua51-specific subpackage there.
Now I see that is the right approach.
Also the old source package lua51-moonscript is an outdated orphan.
On 7 July 2023 14:56:25 GMT+02:00, Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros@runbox.eu> wrote:
-1 for merge.
Custom-editing PKGBUILDs of AUR packages is not something users should regularly do.
If they are compelled to turn to such measures, that means either there is a packaging error, or there needs to be a different variant of that package.
Like in this case: A separate moonscript package for main lua dependency, another one for lua51.
Let's keep both packages as they are.
This is not Gentoo where you can parameterize the build of the same package source via USE flags.
On 7 July 2023 10:56:45 GMT+02:00, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
KokaKiwi [1] filed a request to merge lua51-moonscript [2] into lua- moonscript [3]:
lua51-moonscript can be handled by the lua-moonscript AUR package (just need to toggle a comment)
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/KokaKiwi/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua51-moonscript/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lua-moonscript/
Request #43800 has been Accepted by gromit [1]: [Autogenerated] Accepted merge for lua51-moonscript into lua- moonscript. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/gromit/
participants (4)
-
KokaKiwi
-
Marcell Meszaros
-
Marcell Mészáros
-
notify＠aur.archlinux.org