[arch-dev-public] Status Report 2007-10-15
aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Mon Oct 15 20:23:12 EDT 2007
ArchLinux Status Report, 2007-10-15
Yeah, OK. This one is a little lacking. I was gone most of the week
(Wed - Sun) so much of this is hearsay. Sorry for the long delay in
getting this out, I had a lot of information to parse.
Let me know if I report anything falsely, or I forgot a major milestone.
== Newsworthy Items ==
* Losing some kernels
It looks like, due to external issues, and maintainer workloads, we're
going to be losing two of our additional kernels - ck and suspend2.
This leaves us with one official kernel in the repos.
== Completed Tasks ==
* Successful testing policy implementation
Looks like all the core updates have been using the sign-off policy,
which is great. For filtering purposes, try to use the [signoff] tag.
Thanks to everyone doing this. It also helps the rest of use know
what's going on in [core].
* texinfo moved to core/devel
While this is minor in the grand scheme of things, it's worth a mention here.
* unionfs patch updated
Our unionfs patch in our stock kernel was a bit outdated and has been
updated to the newer branch, which should fix any issues that may have
* The "Big Move" from testing
This weekend db, heimdal, gtk, gnome, gcc and probably others were
moved from testing to core/extra. Special thanks to Andy, Jan, and
everyone else involved in making this happen.
== Pending Tasks, Short Term ==
* New logo
The concept of creating a new logo for Arch has been brought up often enough.
I'd like to see this happen. New repo, new leader, new... well, lots
of stuff. It's only fitting that we modify the logo slightly.
This ML thread has a few references:
The plan, it seems, is to open things up for submissions, then have
the developers and TUs vote on the best logo.
Before this week is up, I'd like to decide on a submission range and
how we want to handle voting.
* The dividing line: extra and community
Now that we cleaned up the blurry line between current and extra with
the core repo, we come across another case of this.
The line between extra and community is not all that clear, so we need
to flesh it out. Is it defined by developer time? Is it defined by
How should we best clarify this?
* Package and Orphan Cleanup
Eric did some amazing work here fleshing out our lists in the dev wiki for this.
I would like to set aside some time this week to actually clean these
up, but we don't need anything fully organized - if anyone has the
time, perhaps we could do this Thursday night (my time, heh)?
* DVD and Additional Package ISO Lists
I generated a stub page last report, but had no time to fill in data.
Please use this to _explicitly_ list things you want or don't want on
these additional ISOs.
When I get the time, I will fill in based on my thoughts.
* Unified chroot build tools
These are still sitting in my personal branch. I was on vacation last
week, so nothing got done.
* Perl policy
I'd like to move to official implementation of this policy listed here:
This week I am going to coordinate with François (Firmicus) and anyone
else interested in our perl packages and clean up what we have.
See the following bug reports:
== Pending Tasks, Long Term ==
* Pacman 3.1 Release
Again, I was away most of last week, so little got completed. I want
to meet up with Dan again this week so we can crack out some of these
* DB Script Rewrite
This one went by the wayside. It appears we're sitting in one of those
"not broke" modes.
I'd still love to actually do this, but I'm moving it to the "long
term" items, as it's not all that critical, and there are better
things to do.
* Official pacbuild usage
Still looking at this report from Jason.
We have an official git repo for pacbuild sitting here:
This is pretty important. I'd like to move us away from this
separation by architecture that we have right now - it shouldn't
matter which architecture a given developer runs when it comes to
* 'Continuous Integration' setup / machine
The state hasn't changed much since last time, however, Dan pointed
out that git actually includes hooks for a CI setup, which is a decent
point in git's favor.
* Modernize our Dashboard
I should be able to pump out some documentation on how to setup a
local instance of our site soon.
I'd like to coordinate with Eliott and Simo about getting a public
(sanitized) git repo up on the projects site so we can begin
developing more readily.
* Architecture Independent Repos
Added to flyspray:
It appears that we can implement noarch packages with very little
changes. This combines, in a way with the Pacman 3.1 release, and db
script rewrites above.
* ArchCon 2009: Big Baaad Idea
Last time I brought up the idea of a donation drive with regards to
sending the developers to a given venue. No one responded to it, so
I'm not sure if it was good or bad.
I wonder... were I not in the position I'm in, would I donate? What
about you guys?
More information about the arch-dev-public