[aur-general] AUR4 migration of orphan packages

Ido Rosen ido at kernel.org
Tue Jun 9 16:02:13 UTC 2015

I didn't know that existed!  Cool.

Maybe this should be front and center next to any links/buttons to
disown a package?  E.g. "Are you sure you want to disown this package?
 Remember, you can always add co-maintainers rather than disowning and
readopting later..."

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Bruno Pagani <bruno.pagani at ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> You mean that:
> https://aur4.archlinux.org/pkgbase/${pkgname}/comaintainers/ ?
> Le 09/06/2015 17:53, Ido Rosen a écrit :
>> I think some of the orphans on AUR are just maintained by multiple
>> people.  The usage pattern is:
>> Person A adopts, updates, and disowns.
>> Person B some time later notices it's out of date, adopts, updates, disowns.
>> It seems perfectly reasonable to have multiple people maintain a
>> package over time this way.  Maybe we just need better support for
>> this style of non-maintainership that isn't quite "orphaned"?  Support
>> for multiple maintainers/collaborators like on GitHub repos?
>> (Outright owning a package in AUR prevents anyone else from updating
>> it.)
>> I do something in between outright maintainership and this "adopt,
>> update, disown" non-maintainership: I have a git repo with my AUR
>> packages, and accept pull requests on GitHub -- if someone wants to
>> update a package faster than I can get to it (since I only have time
>> on weekends), they submit a pull request and I merge it in, test, and
>> submit to AUR (which takes 2 min to verify & submit the package, vs.
>> the a-priori-unknown time commitment of doing it all myself).  It
>> would be nice if there were an official way to make AUR support
>> collaborative maintainership like this.
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini
>> <grazzolini at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 09-06-2015 08:17, Jesse McClure wrote:
>>>> Agreed.  All the packages that no one carries over to aur4 will still be
>>>> archived for some time, so if anyone*actually*  wants them in aur4, they
>>>> can
>>>> adopt them.  One can keep their own store of PKGBUILDs, but the aur is for
>>>> packages that it is likely multiple users will want.  If not even*one*
>>>> person
>>>> wants a package enough to maintain it in the aur, then it doesn't need to
>>>> be
>>>> there.
>>> I have adopted some packages, created a few more, but I think that this
>>> migration should serve the purpose of cleansing the database. We already
>>> have orphans on aur4 and that is unacceptable. Migrate a package and then
>>> orphan it is not ideal and we will end up having the same number of orphans
>>> as we already have.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Giancarlo Razzolini

More information about the aur-general mailing list