[aur-general] Compiz package naming

[Colin Robinson]

I totally agree with you. I was just pointing out why the packages are 
named the way they are. Please change them unless alucryd wants to weigh 
in on the discussion.

On 07/31/2014 08:36 PM, Rob McCathie wrote:
> Guess i'll stop bottom posting when everyone else is top posting :P
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:20 AM, Colin Robinson
> <beardedlinuxgeek at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Comment by alucryd 2014-04-02 07:25
>> "beardedlinuxgeek: Wrong, the latest stable branch is 0.8.x, the 0.9.x
>> branch is unstable.
> This is simply incorrect, as i've explained earlier.
>
>
>> Comment by alucryd 2014-04-01 08:1
>> "Merged a few bzr packages into this one. Could you upload it as
>> 'compiz-core-bzr', all other distros use the 'compiz-core' name. I'll do the
>> merge afterwards."
> Meh. Upstream doesn't recognise the concept of "compiz-core" since the
> 0.9 series. Do we comply with upstream or do we comply with other
> distros? Methinks upstream.
>
>
> Sidenote:
>>>>>> http://www.paradoxcomputers.com.au/arch/packages/compiz-0.9.11.2-1.src.tar.gz
> After some things were noticed and some discussion had in the
> compiz-core-bzr comments, this package has been updated and anyone
> reviewing it should re-download it.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Rob McCathie
>
>
>> Comment by beardedlinuxgeek 2014-04-02 07:39
>> "This package isn't compiz-core. It's compiz-core + all the plugins + ccsm +
>> the gtk decorator + the kde decorator. Take a look at the components
>> (http://releases.compiz.org/components/), compiz-core is just one of 17
>> packages. This package, on the other hand, is all of them"
>>
>> ---
>>
>> So obviously I support korrode's new naming scheme of changing things back
>> to how they were originally named. It doesn't matter to me if you rename
>> compiz-core to compiz-legacy-core or compiz0.8-core, but the word "core"
>> needs to be dropped from all the 0.9x packages.
>>
>>
>> On 07/31/2014 06:40 PM, /dev/rs0 wrote:
>>> Hi Charles,
>>>
>>> I think it makes more sense for you to take over my package.
>>>
>>> As I mentioned, it's basically a derivative of the bzr package. I do enjoy
>>> maintaining packages but I figured, as the bzr package receives development,
>>> it would be simple enough for you to apply any changes to both packages
>>> instead of always going through me.
>>>
>>> On 07/31/2014 06:58 AM, Charles Bos wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> So I'm just wondering if the change should go ahead now as the idea has
>>>> been floating around for nearly a week and nobody has raised objections.
>>>> Regarding the 0.9 bzr package, that would involve me uploading compiz-bzr
>>>> and then requesting compiz-core-bzr be merged.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the stable package, someone should upload the package korrode
>>>> made and ask for compiz-core-devel to be merged into it.
>>>>
>>>> /dev/sr0, what are your feelings on continuing to maintain your package?
>>>> If
>>>> you want to continue maintenance then you should be the one to upload the
>>>> korrode's package and ask for the merger. If you're sure you would prefer
>>>> me to take over as you suggested earlier then please let me know and then
>>>> we know where we stand.
>>>>
>>>> On the subject of the stable package, a tarball for 0.9.11.2 has been
>>>> released on launchpad.net
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 27 July 2014 14:11, Charles Bos <charlesbos1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That's great korrode. Thanks. :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Is everyone agreed vis-a-vis the new name scheme? I only ask because a
>>>>> TU
>>>>> seemed to have other ideas regarding Compiz package naming consistency -
>>>>> I
>>>>> for instance was asked to rename compiz-bzr to compiz-core-bzr.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26 July 2014 16:39, Rob McCathie <korrode at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Rob McCathie <korrode at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry not deletion, get it merged after Chazza uploads.
>>>>>>