[aur-general] TU without [community] maintaining?
x-demon at x-demon.org
Wed Feb 3 13:15:53 EST 2010
I think it's wrong way. Some of packages just install old versions, they
can be adopted by users and updated easily. Take a look at helium, for
example. Fully working pkgbuild, only pkgver needs to be changed to get
Firstly we must take care about really obsolette packages. For example -
sim-im. SVN snapshop, even when we have normal SVN pkgbuild and normal
stable pkgbuild. So sim-im must be removed. And so on. When we finish
cleaning up obsoletes, we can start cleaning up orphans.
Here is my vision how this must work:
1. There is addittional button on pkgbuild's page - Report obsolete.
2. If user clicks this button, notify will be sent, for example, to
3. Mod will remove this packages
4. Package must be moved to some sort of archive - there will always be
human mistakes. That archive can be cleaned, for example, every month.
Or not cleaned at all - pkgbuilds are pretty small :)
5. When user try to create new PKGBUILD with pkgname = name of
previously removed pkgbuild, maybe we must print some notice and link to
old pkgbuild. Old projects can be revived sometimes.
On 03/02/10 19:55, Lauri Niskanen wrote:
> On 02/03/2010 07:48 PM, Lex Rivera wrote:
> > The main reason why a asked for it is amount of crap in AUR. I have my own repo, maybe
> > that's why i'm not interested in [community]. But AUR have huge list of
> > orphaned, outdated, obsolette packages. Most of them can be deleted,
> > since they have no use now. I see them nearly everyday, and... Well, i
> > think you catch that. AUR needs moderators. AUR must be clean.
> > Sorry for my bad english =(
> > On 03/02/10 12:31, Angel Velásquez wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Chris Brannon <cmbrannon79 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Thomas Bächler wrote:
> >>>> I think it is a good idea. We could create the "AUR moderator" position
> >>>> instead of calling it "Semi-TU".
> >>> This is a fine idea, and I see no harm in it.
> >> Im in favour of this, my unique concern is about how hard will be
> >> creating another level of permission in the AUR, and some rules about,
> >> if a semi-tu can orphan packages from TUs or TU-Dev, figuring out that
> >> part, and assuming that will have an approbation, we will start
> >> writting patches, so this can be a "slow" process, (2 months or so if
> >> it's aproved? plus the time of discussion?).
> >> Let's see what happens!
> >> --
> >> Angel Velásquez
> >> angvp @ irc.freenode.net
> >> Arch Linux Trusted User
> >> Linux Counter: #359909
> >> http://www.angvp.com
> Let's start the cleaning here:
> Maybe we should just delete all packages with no votes and that have
> been orphaned.
> -- Ape <Lauri Niskanen>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the aur-general