It looks like the bug reports for 4.1 have stopped, so I guess we should make a maintenance release.
There are a couple of new strings to be translated and a couple of issues reported with translations, so I will need to get those on transifex.
See: here for a list of bugs reported/fixed: https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?do=index&tasks=&project=3&d...
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Anything I have missed? A bug not assigned to 4.1.1 that should be fixed?
Allan
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org wrote:
It looks like the bug reports for 4.1 have stopped, so I guess we should make a maintenance release.
There are a couple of new strings to be translated and a couple of issues reported with translations, so I will need to get those on transifex.
See: here for a list of bugs reported/fixed:
https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?do=index&tasks=&project=3&d...
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete
I just sent a patch to add that.
and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Anything I have missed? A bug not assigned to 4.1.1 that should be fixed?
Allan
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 13:45:
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Speaking about PKGBUILD proto files... The extra package 'abs' installs some proto files which look way outdated. Is anybody working on that? Patches welcome?
On 23/04/13 16:29, Christian Hesse wrote:
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 13:45:
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Speaking about PKGBUILD proto files... The extra package 'abs' installs some proto files which look way outdated. Is anybody working on that? Patches welcome?
I have no interest in ABS.
@Dave: looks like you did the last release. Are you going to fix those?
Allan
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org wrote:
On 23/04/13 16:29, Christian Hesse wrote:
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 13:45:
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Speaking about PKGBUILD proto files... The extra package 'abs' installs
some
proto files which look way outdated. Is anybody working on that? Patches welcome?
I have no interest in ABS.
@Dave: looks like you did the last release. Are you going to fix those?
Allan
If no-one is interested in updating/maintaining abs, we could always move the prototypes currently in to the pacman project. It would make sense as they need to be kept in sync with the changes in makepkg and pacman.
Eric
On 23/04/13 17:53, Eric Bélanger wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org wrote:
On 23/04/13 16:29, Christian Hesse wrote:
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 13:45:
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Speaking about PKGBUILD proto files... The extra package 'abs' installs
some
proto files which look way outdated. Is anybody working on that? Patches welcome?
I have no interest in ABS.
@Dave: looks like you did the last release. Are you going to fix those?
Allan
If no-one is interested in updating/maintaining abs, we could always move the prototypes currently in to the pacman project. It would make sense as they need to be kept in sync with the changes in makepkg and pacman.
Eric
I see no point for VCS prototypes now that they are just a source line.
That leaves perl/python/haskell/gnome etc which I count as too distro specific to be included (and hopefully will disappear with the templating idea that is floating around).
Allan
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 18:06:
On 23/04/13 17:53, Eric Bélanger wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org wrote:
On 23/04/13 16:29, Christian Hesse wrote:
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 13:45:
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Speaking about PKGBUILD proto files... The extra package 'abs' installs
some
proto files which look way outdated. Is anybody working on that? Patches welcome?
I have no interest in ABS.
@Dave: looks like you did the last release. Are you going to fix those?
Allan
If no-one is interested in updating/maintaining abs, we could always move the prototypes currently in to the pacman project. It would make sense as they need to be kept in sync with the changes in makepkg and pacman.
Eric
I see no point for VCS prototypes now that they are just a source line.
Could be worth to provide a VCS prototype that shows how to use the pkgver() function.
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Christian Hesse list@eworm.de wrote:
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 18:06:
On 23/04/13 17:53, Eric Bélanger wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org wrote:
On 23/04/13 16:29, Christian Hesse wrote:
Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org on Tue, 2013/04/23 13:45:
The PKGBUILD proto files could have the prepare() function added just to be more complete and fix the remaining bug is someone wants to volunteer to do that...
Speaking about PKGBUILD proto files... The extra package 'abs' installs
some
proto files which look way outdated. Is anybody working on that? Patches welcome?
I have no interest in ABS.
@Dave: looks like you did the last release. Are you going to fix those?
Allan
If no-one is interested in updating/maintaining abs, we could always move the prototypes currently in to the pacman project. It would make sense as they need to be kept in sync with the changes in makepkg and pacman.
Eric
I see no point for VCS prototypes now that they are just a source line.
Could be worth to provide a VCS prototype that shows how to use the pkgver() function. -- main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH" "CX:;",b;for(a/* Chris get my mail address: */=0;b=c[a++];) putchar(b-1/(/* gcc -o sig sig.c && ./sig */b/42*2-3)*42);}
Sorry for bumping a thread from April, but the VCS prototypes are still an issue.
These prototypes are getting exceptionally dated, and they need to be either removed or updated.
Can a final decision be made on what to do with them please?
If it's decided to remove them, can someone please remove them from ABS and tag a new version? I think there's already a patch on arch-projects to remove them all. It just needs to be applied.
For what it's worth, I would really like to keep them around, preferably after moving them from ABS to pacman. I want to keep them around because they are useful for quickly getting a generic pkgver() function from, e.g., PKGBUILD-git.proto. If you decide to keep them, I will gladly send in a patch to update/move them. And if downstream packagers/distros don't want to include the VCS prototypes, they can easily remove them.
Jason
pacman-dev@lists.archlinux.org