[aur-general] AUR Cleanup Day organization

[Lukáš Jirkovský]

The list is good idea, maybe someone (eg me ;-)) finds out that there
is some interesting package and he will adopt it.

2008/5/3 Allan McRae <mcrae_allan at hotmail.com>:
> Alessio Bolognino wrote:
>
> > On Fri 2008-05-02 12:08 , Eric Belanger wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, 3 May 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Luká Jirkovský wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > But in other way, packages without arch field are usually very, very
> old.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > Then they probably fall in this category of the suggest removal
> guidelines
> > > > - outdated and orphaned packages with few or no votes
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This situation is behind my reasoning to create a list of potential
> removals first.  I think we need to be careful of removing too many
> packages, especially in our first cleanup attempt.  Just the really unneeded
> ones as a first step.  I had even considered that once the list was made,
> then I would archive all the relevant PKGBUILDs before deleting them. But it
> would be better to just not delete useful packages in the first place...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I don't think it's a good idea to remove orphaned packages simply
> because they are out-of-date. Even out-of-date they can still be useful as
> it's better than having no PKGBUILD at all and maybe someone will adopt them
> eventually.  That's the reason why we call it unsupported: the PKGBUILD can
> be out-of-date, unmaintained or not very good quality-wise.  A lot of work
> has been invested in these PKGBUILD.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I totally agree with Eric here. I'm a bit worried about this "cleanup
> frenzy": there is a package in the
> > AUR that is out-of-date and doesn't even compile. Why should we
> > remove it? As Eric said, it's better than nothing.
> >
> > Unless the package is obsolete (e.g. gaim/pidgin) or it is a package
> > already in the repos, IMHO there is no need to remove it.
> >
> > If a PKGBUILD contains errors, fix it, if you want to, but do not remove
> > it. What about a "bug-fix day" instead of a "cleanup day" ?
> >
> >
> >
>  Let me be clear here that I will in now way encourage the deletion of
> anything that may be useful in the future.  I now how annoying it can be to
> have packages you have spent time on deleted from the AUR even if you have
> orphaned them  (who deleted dpkg & rpm...  I am actually quite pissed off
> about that).  This is my reasoning behind creating a list first.  That way
> there is time for people to object to the removals before it happens.
>
>  As an example, look at the alienarena packages.  I'm reasonably sure
> alienarena2007 is replaced by alienarena.  And I only looked at a couple of
> pages...
>
>  Allan
>
>
>
>
>