[aur-general] Compiz package naming

[Rob McCathie]

On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Charles Bos <charlesbos1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi /dev/rs0,
>
> Chazza here. If you don't want to continue maintaining compiz-core-devel
> I'd be fine with taking over.
>
> Regards
>
>
> On 25 July 2014 17:17, /dev/rs0 <rs0 at secretco.de.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Everyone,
>>
>> I think it definitely makes sense to drop the 'core' name and take on the
>> 'legacy' scheme as described.
>>
>> Additionally, seeing as 'compiz-core-bzr' is more actively maintained, and
>> that 'compiz-core-devel' is basically a derivative now; I've been curious
>> if Chazza would like to adopt the package.
>>
>> I occasionally receive patches from him and notice much more community
>> involvement on the Wiki/AUR/Forums in regard to 'compiz-core-bzr'. I seem
>> to be an unnecessary middleman for such an infrequently updated package.
>>
>> /dev/rs0
>>
>>
>> On 07/25/2014 03:43 AM, Rob McCathie wrote:
>>
>>> Hello AUR general & Compiz package maintainers.
>>>
>>> There was some discussion about Compiz packages a little while ago, i
>>> don't think that much came of it. I'd like to re-open the discussion.
>>>
>>> My opinions/suggestions:
>>>
>>> Calling the 0.8 series "compiz" and the 0.9 series "compiz-devel" is
>>> no longer correct, it hasn't been for quite some time.
>>>
>>> All information on this page:
>>> http://www.compiz.org/
>>> is completely wrong and out of date, like 5 years out of date, and
>>> should not be used as a reference for anything.
>>> Tracking of the state of Compiz should be done from here:
>>> https://launchpad.net/compiz
>>>
>>> Development of the 0.8 series is as close to being dead as it could
>>> be. Unless you count 2 tiny commits 5 months ago, nothing has been
>>> done in 16 months, and even that 16 month old commit was a minor
>>> change just to get it working with KDE 4.10, with the commit prior to
>>> that being an additional 5 months back.
>>> http://cgit.compiz.org/compiz/core/log/?h=compiz-0.8
>>>
>>> My suggestion is pretty simple, "compiz" becomes the 0.9 series, the
>>> 0.8 series becomes "compiz-legacy".
>>> Any 0.9 series packages that have "core" in their name should have it
>>> removed, since the concept of Compiz being split up has been dropped
>>> since the 0.9 series. The 0.9 series doesn't have a "core" component,
>>> it's just "compiz".
>>>
>>> Some examples:
>>>
>>> martadinata666's "compiz-core" package would become "compiz-legacy-core"
>>>
>>> dev_rs0's "compiz-core-devel" package would become simply "compiz"
>>>
>>> Chazza's "compiz-core-bzr" package would become "compiz-bzr"
>>>
>>> flexiondotorg's "compiz-core-mate" package would become
>>> "compiz-legacy-core-mate"
>>>
>>> My "compiz-gtk-standalone" package would become
>>> "compiz-legacy-gtk-standalone"
>>>
>>> All the "compiz-fusion-plugins-*" packages would become
>>> "compiz-legacy-fusion-plugins-*"
>>>
>>> ...and so on.
>>>
>>> What are everyone's thoughts?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Rob McCathie
>>>
>>



Charles, i started setting up my new package for Manjaro and since it
included converting the package back to using release archives and
doing 90% of the work to make a suitable generic 'compiz' package for
AUR, i figured i'd post it to you, maybe save you a few mins:

http://www.paradoxcomputers.com.au/arch/packages/compiz-0.9.11.2-1.src.tar.gz

I retained your style and patchset, the only thing i did change was
setting cpp as a default plugin at compile time, rather than modifying
the .desktop file... because who isn't going to use ccp? ;)
Plus minimal users who start compiz from their xinitrc get no use from
the .desktop file.

The package is named simply "compiz". If we're going to go with the
naming convention as discussed, Charles can simply upload this package
(or whatever), /dev/sr0 you could just flag your package for deletion.

--
Regards,
Rob McCathie