[aur-general] Orphan Request: eclipse-dltk-* packages maintained by emphire

[Shanto]

On 11/02/2011 06:00 AM, Jon Wiersma wrote:
> Hi Shanto.
>
> I've been pretty busy and haven't had a chance to update my packages for a bit.
>
> I would like to see whomever is responsible for the eclipse-dltk-*
> packages also maintain the following packages as well:
>
> - eclipse-antlr-runtime
> - eclipse-dtp
> - eclipse-h2-database
> - eclipse-pdt
> - eclipse-pdt-debugger
> - eclipse-rse
> - eclipse-wtp

I use all of these packages.

> The reason for this is that these eclipse plugins all depend on each
> other in one way or another and it's hard to get several people to
> co-oridnate releases so they all work at once. Especially eclipse-pdt.

That's very much true.

> Let me know if you're willing and able to handle all of these
> packages, keep them more up to date than I am and

I am willing to, but I should mention about some of my limitations 
before that:

1. I am not a Java guy. (but I know eclipse from outside well).
2. My Internet is a bit slow if you consider the size of eclipse 
packages. I still try to keep my installations up-to-date. As a 
maintainer, you may have to quickly download and test different 
versions/release types - which may not go well with this limitation of mine.

Other than these, I try to respond quickly when people marks/comments my 
packages out of date. I get remote shells to compensate where necessary. 
Simple release updates with version/url/checksum bumps goes fast. Only 
testing gets delayed. (However, does that matter much? Arch/AUR users 
are naturally testers. If I miss one, someone else will notice it and 
ask me to fix.)

And, I am a eclipse fan. Its bloated, slow and whatnot. But still 
there's no better tightly integrated all-rounder. Yeah, Zend could put 
some more care on PDT if you take into consideration their PDT 
originated sales, but otherwise, eclipse is great.

 > make sure that whoever takes them over after you will do the same

Will do.

> and I'll try to co-ordinate a time to orphan them with you so you can grab them all.

Can we have a TU help us on this?

> If not, I'll update them soon.

I just summarized above my advantages and limitations. Now you balance 
them with yours. If you think that can do better, lets have some TU help us.

Thanks,
Shanto

> Cheers,
>
> Jon
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Shanto<shanto at hotmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>> I am sorry to bump this thread but it seems like my request escaped everyone's eyes last time. I brought this up in the IRC channel yesterday and some people suggested me just to bump it. So..
>>
>> To recap, all eclipse-dltk-* packages from emphire are out-of-date:
>> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?K=emphire&SeB=m
>>
>> NOTE 1: DLTK Stable 3.0.1 was released on August 26, 2011:
>> http://download.eclipse.org/technology/dltk/downloads/drops/R3.0/S-3.0.1-201108261011/
>>
>> NOTE 2: emphire doesn't seem to respond to user requests since 30th June:
>> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19400
>>
>> NOTE 3: I do maintain some eclipse/related packages, and I am interested to 1) adopt, 2) update and 3) keep maintaining/updating in sync with upstream releases.
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> @ emphire: Please disown these eclipse/dltk packages for now. If I adopt your packages, I promise, I will give these back to you as soon as you get back to AUR and ask me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shanto
>> (Arch UEU)
>>
>> On 10/24/2011 09:24 PM, Shanto wrote:
>>>
>>> Ref:
>>> http://download.eclipse.org/technology/dltk/downloads/drops/R3.0/S-3.0.1-201108261011/
>>>
>>>
>>> All eclipse-dltk-* packages are out of date since August/September.
>>> While I have flagged rest of them just yesterday, eclipse-dltk-python
>>> was flagged since 2nd October, 2011. These out-of-date packages, in
>>> addition to some comments posted, make it apparent that emphire is no
>>> more interested or too busy to maintain these packages any more (no
>>> offence).
>>>
>>> As I already maintain eclipse-platform and some related stuff, I am
>>> willing to adopt these packages if orphaned.
>>>
>>> In addition, I am thinking if bundling these packages under a single
>>> package (eclipse-dltk or eclipse-dltk-bundle) makes better sense. (see
>>> the all-in-one bundle and integration components in dltk download page)
>>> Knowledgeable/experienced Eclipse users and maintainers, please suggest.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shanto
>>>
>>>
>>
>