[PRQ#42135] Orphan Request for rapidsvn
MarsSeed [1] filed an orphan request for rapidsvn [2]: Package is broken with C++17 standard level, and with wxwidgets3+ dependency. These issues have been mentioned in comments in 2021 and 2022, respectively. But the package owner did not respond. And now after I suggested update commits from the project's git master branch, and flagged the package because the issues have been fixed in non-release-tagged git commits, maintainer just shouted angrily at me in private email. The project's last official release version was published in 2012. But since then, developer has continuously fixed the code with git commits, to make it compatible with newer libraries and fix bugs. I recommend to disown the package, so someone else who is willing to do what needs to be done could adopt it. A verbatim copy of owner's private email to me: "On 13 June 2023 20:13:10 GMT+02:00, nmlibertarian@gmail.com wrote: Out of date for rapidsvn is wrong IF that IS the latest release...which it appears to be ! Perhaps YOU would like to make a "rapidsvn-git" package ? If NOT, then I will be happy to do so. Please advise on this PRIVATELY, as back and forth in the COMMENTS section of a aur package is discouraged whenever possible. TIA for your reply. " [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/rapidsvn/
My response; Using caps for single words is not necessarily shouting, and I am sorry if the fellow took it that way. ^^ It can also mean emphasis... !! More to the point: - I was not aware it was expected that I respond to problems that are upstream, and cannot be fixed by myself. - I cannot simply change it to a -git package, as that is a new package; and the fellow complaining should know that. - My offer to make a new -git package is still extant, as is my offer that he can do so if he would like. - "Orphaning" a package that cannot be updated to a new release because the upstream author has NOT made available; seems to be a very odd request. My suggestion: - So, please consider simply removing the package, since it appears to be so displeasing to keep this around. - OR, please let me contact the upstream author and see IF he will consider making a new release, either from his website OR from his git repo. Best regards - Not_So_Anonymous On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 12:56 PM <notify@aur.archlinux.org> wrote:
MarsSeed [1] filed an orphan request for rapidsvn [2]:
Package is broken with C++17 standard level, and with wxwidgets3+ dependency.
These issues have been mentioned in comments in 2021 and 2022, respectively.
But the package owner did not respond.
And now after I suggested update commits from the project's git master branch, and flagged the package because the issues have been fixed in non-release-tagged git commits, maintainer just shouted angrily at me in private email.
The project's last official release version was published in 2012.
But since then, developer has continuously fixed the code with git commits, to make it compatible with newer libraries and fix bugs.
I recommend to disown the package, so someone else who is willing to do what needs to be done could adopt it.
A verbatim copy of owner's private email to me:
"On 13 June 2023 20:13:10 GMT+02:00, nmlibertarian@gmail.com wrote: Out of date for rapidsvn is wrong IF that IS the latest release...which it appears to be !
Perhaps YOU would like to make a "rapidsvn-git" package ?
If NOT, then I will be happy to do so.
Please advise on this PRIVATELY, as back and forth in the COMMENTS section of a aur package is discouraged whenever possible.
TIA for your reply. "
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/rapidsvn/
- I cannot simply change it to a -git package, as that is a new package; and the fellow complaining should know that. - My offer to make a new -git package is still extant, as is my offer that he can do so if he would like. - "Orphaning" a package that cannot be updated to a new release because the upstream author has NOT made available; seems to be a very odd request.
My suggestion: - So, please consider simply removing the package, since it appears to be so displeasing to keep this around. - OR, please let me contact the upstream author and see IF he will consider making a new release, either from his website OR from his git repo.
Building the package from a specific commit as suggested in the comments is a sensible choice in this case, even some Arch packages do that when releases are old and compiling become problematic
Request #42135 has been Rejected by MarsSeed [1]: Revoking orphan request. Please kindly disregard. I might have misunderstood maintainer @not_anonymous' communication in their email response. Sorry if I acted a bit too hastily with filing this request. There is grounds for discussing the ways to fix this package, and @not_anonymous has expressed willingness to cooperate. I recommend that the discussion is continued on the public AUR package page in the form of comments: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/rapidsvn [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/
participants (3)
-
Fabio Loli
-
nmlibertarian＠gmail.com
-
notify＠aur.archlinux.org