[aur-general] Applying for TU-ship

[Ronald van Haren]

Please try to keep the discussion in one thread and don't start a new
one for every question you get. Besides that, you misspelled my name
;)

Besides that I took a quick look at some of your packages (started in
alphabetical order I came to dia-svn if someone wants to check
further).
Some remarks:

- The # $ID line has no use for packages in unsupported. If you adopt
a package which has been dropped into unsupported you can safely
remove that line on the first update you do.

- aumix needs a conflicts and provides field with aumix-gtk in
community. Besides that the comment that is still there from the time
it was in extra is a bit confusing.

- '# Adopted by:' is no valid field. See for example autoaur

-  A lot of packages have only arch=('i686') set. Please try to verify
if it also works on x86_64.

- In biblatex you can create the directories with one install command like
install -d $pkgdir/opt/texlive/texmf-local/{bibtex,doc/biblatex,tex/latex/biblatex}
Same yields for biblatex-dw.

- In biblatex, LPPL is a custom license, so the license field should read
license=('custom: LPPL'). Same for biblatex-dw

- Don't use the replaces field in bibledesktop-devel. For these cases
conflicts and provides is enough (see man PKGBUILD)

- try to follow the cvs guidelines in the build part of bluefish-cvs

- in bmeps: license field should read license=('BSD') not custom:BSD

- concordance: don't use echo inside the build function. If you don't
know the license, use license=('unknown') or something.

- Try to avoid using cp for copying one file. Use install instead in ctwm.

- don't use the replaces field in dia-svn.

Regards,

Ronald


On 8/19/08, Ronald van Haren <pressh at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/19/08, stefan-husmann at t-online.de <stefan-husmann at t-online.de> wrote:
>>  At the time I maintain 108 packages in AUR. Not all of them were
>>  written my me, but some of them I made after package requests on
>>  archlinux.org. Also I am active in the forums at archlinux.org and
>>  archlinux.de.
>
> I haven't checked them yet, I'll do so later. I see a lot of these
> packages have few votes, I assume you don't plan to move them all to
> community?
>
>>
>>  I consider myself still being in a learning phase. Two months or so I
>>  was not able to do a proper patching of packages, now I am. So
>>  packaging is a hobby to me now.
>>
>>  I only own a i686 computer, have no experience with the x86_64
>>  architecture. Building packages for both arches seems a lot of work to
>>  me, especially if you are bound to a remote machine. So as a TU I
>>  would have to concentrate a bit more on really important packages. But
>>  on the other hand it is hard for me to see orphaned packages lying
>>  around, an often I pick them. :)
>>
> It is not really a lot of work to build on a remove machine. It only
> takes little more time compared to building on your local machine.
> Just take as many packages as you can do, but please try to build them
> for both architectures at times that there is a build machine
> available. Are you willing to do so?
>
> You said you want to concentrate on really important packages. That
> brings up the million dollar question: what are really important
> packages in your eyes?
>
>
>>  In the forums i act under my real name, in AUR I have a nick, haawda.
>>  I can change that if you mind.
>>
> It does not really matter, though it may be convenient  if people do
> not use too many different names ;)
>
> Ronald
>