[aur-general] Moving packages to Community
yaro at marupa.net
Mon Feb 7 13:44:53 EST 2011
On Monday, February 07, 2011 12:22:41 Ángel Velásquez wrote:
> 2011/2/7 Yaro Kasear <yaro at marupa.net>:
> > On Saturday, February 05, 2011 14:49:49 Ángel Velásquez wrote:
> >> 2011/2/5 Nicky726 <nicky726 at gmail.com>:
> >> > To Angel Velasquez: the nature of the relation is not like an
> >> > ownership, but more like an authorship. Is it that much to show your
> >> > respect to the author by a polite question? After all we are people,
> >> > not mindless machines nor animals.
> >> Hi Nicky,
> >> This is opensource world dude, can you see it?, so forget those
> >> "autorship" and "license" of those PKGBUILD, plus, in many cases, many
> >> of the packages went from one people to another. Btw I don't know why
> >> people refers to packages when we are talking about aurballs
> >> containing PKGBUILD, this is different from a package.
> > They're still packages, whether they contain actual binaries or source
> > code is irrelevent. What do you think tarballs are? The ONLY difference
> > is in how the packages are installed.
> As I aurballs and pkgs are different, even for harder you try to seems
> equals is not the same.
They're not that different. They still result in a package managed by things
liek pacman. The only difference is they're built from source. Same goes for
anythign in the ABS.
> > Also, open source does not mean "no credit" or "courtesy free." All he's
> > asking is to be told when the PKGBUILD he is maintaining is taken over
> > and moved to [community]. I personally would enjoy being asked
> > permission first as well.
> Forget about permission, a PKGBUILD isn't your daughter and moving to
> community doesn't mean marry her, so, get off that cloud, I can notice
> you that I TU or Developer will move your package to community /
> extra, that's courtesy, but I don't and I won't expect you to give me
> any kind of authorization, is that clear for you?
Except your attitude seems to be against any form of courtesy or communication
with the community at all. I don't give two shits if you're a TU, if you move
my PKGBUILD to [community] without telling me, I *will* be pissed off.
> >> As Ioni said, he kept the Contributor tag, I don't see the point of
> >> whining if your work as a maintainer is recognized on that PKGBUILD
> >> but I don't see the point of contributing expecting recognition, we
> >> are humans, I know, but what can make you happier than the fact that
> >> your work evolved and now you have opportunity to evolve with it too
> >> (i.e maintaining new PKGBUILD and then applying to be a TU).
> > So if you're maintaining a bunch of PKGBUILDs on the AUR and, say,
> > hypothetically, that I, if I were a TU, were to move every single one of
> > your packages effectively to [community] without typing a word to you
> > about it, you won't get mad that suddenly you don't get any
> > consideration? No, names in PKGBUILDs is NOT enough, as many people DO
> > use AUR helpers and never even see the PKGBUILDs they are working with.
> > Also, his point isn't recognition, but COURTESY.
> That happened to me and I didn't whine, that works for me when I
> applied to be a TU, and plus, if you want to be famous doing packages,
> find other place where the devs get payed, I guess you use pacman or
> any helper to install your packages and you aren't doing pacman -Qi
> for every package that you installed for free and I guess you also
> doesn't send a note of `courtesy` congratulating the maintainer for
> his work, so WHY if you install stuff without permission (which is the
> sane thing) why you pretend a Dev or TU should ask you for anything?,
> many of TU or Devs started like you or the rest (me including),
> maintaining stuff on AUR then applied to be a TU, and nobody of us
> pretended to ask for permission, that is beurocracy, what if you don't
> want to give me the maintainership of a PKGBUILD and I want to put it
> into binaries repos, users will be affected (downloading sources +
> compiling) just because you're selfish, and is `YOUR PACKAGE` so hell
> no, as long we publish the sources of our packages and users can do
> everything they want with it (add flags, remove patches, etc) we can
> do the same with the users contributions, we are developers, and users
Again, you seem to hang on the "fame" thing. That wasn't his point. His point
was someone moved his stuff into [commnity] without telling him. Get off the
fame thing. He's not arguing for fame, I am not arguing for fame, and you're
trying to get off the actual point, which you're not making a good argument
> >> We eventually show our respect to the author to notice him that we do
> >> will move your package, but it's arrogant and too stupid to pretend
> >> that a TU or Dev have to `ask you for permission` <--- THIS IS
> >> MADNESS, you aren't the owner of that PKGBUILD ! even if you wrote it
> >> from scratch! the next thing after from asking for permission will be
> >> "please pay me" .. so hell no.
> > Why is it madness to show someone courtesy and some consideration for
> > being the maintainer of the PKGBUILD? No, it's madness to be an asshole
> > to the maintainer of the PKGBUILD and not even give thought to TELLING
> > them their package is now in [community].
> The madness is to pretend to I as a TU or Dev have to ask your
> permission, as I said before, a PKGBUILD is not your daughter and I am
> not asking to marry with, so I don't have to ask you permission for
> anything, or you've asked devs or tu permission for anything in any
> moment? As I said, telling him that a package is hitting a binary repo
> is fine, but forget about permission stuff, right?, Or did you adopted
> a package and contacted the last maintainer asking his permission?
I said NOTIFICATION, not asking permission. Again, for a TU, you seem to have
no clue what AUR maintainers are asking for. At all.
> > Whether someone "owns" the PKGBUILD is quite irrelevant. A LOT of
> > maintainers put their heart and soul into making sure those PKGBUILDs
> > actually work on more than their own computers. TUs don't "own" those
> > packages either, and they really should be at least NOTIFYING the
> > maintainer of the acquisition.
> Notifying is enough, or you want a special picture of you on the front
Except you made VERY clear on your original post in this thread you don't even
see the point in notifying someone, which is what he was asking for.
> > So hell yes, there should at least be a notification. If it
> > inconveniences you, then you should not be a TU.
> Or you shouldn't use Arch Linux, right? :). Arch is one of the
> projects which works closely with the community, I invite you to go
> other communities and see how the opinions of the `mortals` doesn't
> count for anything :).
Oh, believe me, that was why I left Ubuntu. Its "community" is a bunch of
people Canonical put in charge.
> >> EOF
> > Wow, your attitude toward AUR package maintainers makes me wanna put
> > PKGBUILDs on my own site instead of the AUR. There I can DEFINITEY "own"
> > PKGBUILDs if I want to, but further, I'd be able to keep people with
> > your hostile attitude away from my own maintainership. The only downside
> > is my package will not be part of any official repository that way, and
> > who would that help?
> AUR PKGBUILDS are not official, do you realize that? or I have to draw
> you better?, I am AUR package maintainer too, but I have the foots on
> the ground, and I am not believe special and I don't expect special
> recognition for my work to the project, many of people that adopted
> packages that I used to maintain, removed me on the contributor tag,
> and who cares? as long as I know that I contribute with this project
> is enough for me, if I would like to contribute expecting recognition
> or regalies, I surely applied for a canonical or red hat job.
Official or not, courtesy is still important for a real community, as is
communication. And there you go with the fame argument that NOBODY but you are
arguing about. Most people in the AUR who are not TUs would certainly like to
be TOLD when their package is moved, but you're arguing against that, trying
to lord your status as a TU over it. You're acting as bad as the so-called
"community leaders" Canonical put all over the Ubuntu "community."
> Think about it.
I have, and you're makign a bunch of non-arguments for points nobody actually
made in this thread.
More information about the aur-general