[aur-general] AUR 3.0.0-rc1 released

[Dave Reisner]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 08:45:16PM -0400, Yichao Yu wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Dave Reisner <d at falconindy.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 06:57:33PM -0500, Doug Newgard wrote:
> >> On 2014-04-30 17:20, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> >> >A first release candidate of the AUR 3.0.0 has been released! You can
> >> >give it a try at [1]. Note that due to internal changes, the setup at
> >> >aur-dev.archlinux.org uses a different database than aur.archlinux.org.
> >> >You should be able login using your regular AUR account, though.
> >> >
> >> >The most important changes are:
> >> >
> >> >* Full split package support.
> >> >* Support for {make,check,opt}depends, conflicts, provides, ...
> >> >* Full support for the new fields in the RPC interface.
> >> >* Metadata support. Use mkaurball instead of `makepkg --source` to
> >> >  generate source tarballs for the AUR`. You can get it from [2] -- it
> >> >  will eventually be moved to [community].
> >> >
> >> >Note that in order to obtain the new fields, you need to request
> >> >the new
> >> >version of the RPC API explicitly, like this:
> >> >
> >> >    https://aur-dev.archlinux.org/rpc.php?type=info&arg=pass&v=2
> >> >
> >> >Otherwise, the replies default to the old format for compatibility
> >> >reasons.
> >> >
> >> >Please report any bugs to the AUR bug tracker [3].
> >> >
> >> >[1] https://aur-dev.archlinux.org/
> >> >[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pkgbuild-introspection-git/
> >> >[3] https://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?project=2
> >>
> >> It appears that pkgbase is now the important part of a PKGBUILD,
> >
> > But note that it doesn't need to be included. Same as makepkg, it
> > defaults to pkgname[0] if it isn't defined.
> >
> >> that's what people would be requesting deletion or merging on? Makes
> >> merges a bit tough, since you can't upload a PKGBUILD with a
> >> different pkgbase but an overlapping pkgname.
> >
> > You'd be referring to the package by its pkgbase, since that's the
> > unifying factor. If 'foo' is split into 'python-foo' and 'python2-foo',
> > you wouldn't ask to merge/delete 'python-foo' or 'python2-foo'. This
> > doesn't make sense -- you'd just upload a new source tarball with the
> > modification.
> >
> > I don't understand your concern over overlapping pkgnames. If you want
> > to take ownership of existing packages, you should be asking for the
> > package to be disowned, not merged, same as today.
> 
> I'm not sure if this is the original concern but one of my concern
> that might be related is that for example there are two packages
> python-foo and python2-foo which provide the python3 and python2
> versions respectively. What should I do if I want to merge the two
> packages into a split package that provide both. Asking for merge and
> update the package later? AUR won't let me to upload a new version of
> python-foo that provide python2-foo otherwise.

Then you update the package after the merge happens, rather than before
(and perhaps attach your PKGBUILD to the merge request).