[aur-general] Package review bitcoin-classic

Tom Zander tomz at freedommail.ch
Wed Jan 11 12:22:02 UTC 2017

On Saturday, 7 January 2017 18:53:46 CET Bruno Pagani via aur-general wrote:
> > There are 4, almost identical, versions.
> > 
> > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoin-classic/
> > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoin-classic-daemon/
> > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoin-classic-git/
> > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoind-classic-git/
> > 
> > I inherited some of those, hence the slight difference in naming. Not
> > sure if renaming is possible and if the bitcoind- one may be more easy
> > to find under a different name.
> I’ll eventually make a review a bit latter (need to fix things following
> review of my own packages), but regarding the name, yes it can be changed:


Thanks, I went through the motions. Looks good. Thanks for the detailed 

> Regarding naming for daemon between `d` suffix or `-daemon`, I have no
> opinion and either most people here don’t have one or agree to the only
> answer you got before[0], but it should indeed be consistent between VCS
> and non-VCS package of the same software. ;)

I went for the “foo-daemon-git” solution, makes sense to me.
> > Any feedback welcome, and naturally I'd love it if those packages would
> > be able to reach the community repo, but maybe they need a little more
> > time to mature, I'm not sure.
> > 
> I might come back to you once more when I’ll had the time to review your
> packages, but I think some (more experienced) users will provide some
> feedback in between and that might not be necessary anymore. ;)

Thanks! And good luck with your TU application! :)
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel

More information about the aur-general mailing list