[aur-general] TU application, sponsored by Lukas Fleischer

[Jonas Heinrich]

On 01-22 21:59, Xyne wrote:
> [...]
> There are some nice PKGBUILDs there but so far the majority of what I
> have seen has been of poor quality. Most of us (the TUs) probably have at least
> one or two sub-standard PKGBUILDs lying around waiting to get flagged and
> updated, but overall there should be consistent quality. 
You are absolutely right Xyne. I orphaned about 100 packages that I adopted
over time but never really used. I should really stick to the important
packages that I use for myself on daily basis.
Actually I'm aware of the basic packaging standards and I never used
outdated syntax like return-statements or srcdest variables, but I had
a lot of them in broken packages I adopted.
On the one side, quality counts but on the other site I'm often
frustrated to see that many dysfunctional packages ...

On 01-24 21:22, Doug Newgard wrote:
> And if that is the case, fine. But let's again take a look at the
> example he held up, gitlab. The package was updated two days ago, addressed 
> none of the concerns I and other commenters raised. His response is: 
> "Sorry but I don't have the time now to look at all your changes. I'll do that 
> later." Nothing yet, not to mention that it wouldn't even build at the time
> he uploaded it because of a bad checksum.
I must say that the Gitlab packages is a very difficult one and it's not
that easy to fix certain things because they need a lot of testing.
Also friends told me that they invested a lot of time setting it up on Debian
or Ubuntu, following the very complex official installation instruction.
Earlier versions of Gitlab had a lot of errors and Ruby is not that easy
to debug. I managed to ease the installation a lot and also rewrote the
installation instructions on the wiki (before that, it was just a copy
and paste of the official instruction which didn't really fit to
ArchLinux systems).
Unfortunately the interest in this package went up over the last days
and exactly at this time I'm getting a cold :( I really want to address
the concerns as soon I'm back on track ;)

On 01-22 23:56, Balló György wrote:
> I agree with Xyne. You have to learn some more things and clean up
> your packages before you are ready.
I'll recheck my packages and than you have to decide. I'm still
motivated to improve my contributions :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20140125/b0a3e201/attachment.asc>