[aur-general] SGE Orphaning

[Manhong Dai]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 4:57 PM Manhong Dai <daimh at umich.edu> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020, 4:34 PM Manhong Dai <daimh at umich.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020, 4:05 PM Amin Vakil via aur-general <
>> aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I remember you have said that you use this package on your servers in
>>> university, so why don't you just create a new package with any
>>> modifications you need in PKGBUILD and even make it specified for your
>>> needs if you want to and use it for yourself?
>>
>>
>>> What are you trying to accomplish with being called "maintainer" of sge
>>> package?
>>>
>>> You can post your PKGBUILD on github/gitlab or any other git service
>>> online to track the modifications, being able to download it from
>>> anywhere, ask for other people's opinion, etc.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your suggestions! As I mentioned in my last comment of
>> the package, I already published my work on github.
>> https://github.com/daimh/sge
>>
>> I am also not trying to be a maintainer of the package. If you read my
>> last comment, you can see I am actually fine as long as my name and my
>> patch's copyright is acknowledged in a clear way. Right now, it looks like
>> the current maintainer made those code modification.
>>
>> Actually you raised a very good question. The thing is the current
>> maintainer should answer it. Why does the current maintainer want to become
>> the maintainer while he knows every AUR rule and can easily clone one? And
>> why  don't a TU ask the new maintainer this question?
>>
>> Now I believe it is well known that I was very innocent as I didn't
>> receive any notification and I sent out an email immediately after the
>> package was adopted; It is clear that I am capable enough to add CMake
>> support, make SGE run on four Major Linux distributions and wont make any
>> simple shell script error; And more importantly, I am very responsible for
>> my work as all my published work are tested.
>>
>> It is really up to AUR to see how they handle this mistake caused by
>> their bug.
>>
>> I am fine with whatever decision AUR made. However this is a good case
>> for any new AUR package maintainer in future. After all, unlike most of the
>> guys in this email list, it is not surprising that I have been sleeping in
>> hospital for just two months. At my age, anything could happen. :)
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Manhong
>>
>>
> I just thought it again, and here is my proposal.
>
> The current maintainer keeps the package, but he needs to use my one
> single patch file and add the two lines at the bottom of this email to the
> top of the patch file. I think I am very reasonable. Plus this one patch
> file benefits all Linux distribution administrators.
>
> I am so sorry for 'spamming' other innocent users in this list. But please
> understand me as the first reply of current maintainer is Chinese......
>
>
> Best,
> Manhong
>
>
> Developed by Manhong Dai <daimh at umich.edu>
>
> Copyright © 2020 University of Michigan. License GPLv3+
> <https://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>: GNU GPL version 3 or later
>

Another fun fact just for the record.

The latest bug that the current maintainer just fixed is below. It is as
simple as a wrong location of the double quote, but it will fail the whole
makepkg.
<<<
package() {
    "cd ${pkgname}-${pkgver}/source"
>>>
this double quote bug exists in the three commits.
2bc33b5, OCT 18, 02:05
a7bb16b, Oct 13, 20:29
9ee5075, Oct 13 15:01

If today Alad didn't trigger me to test the package again because I
accidentally removed a comment this weekend, I don't know how long this bug
will persist. After all, the current maintainer said "I know that there is
an error in package() when building in clean chroot. I'll fixed that a few
days later".

Best,
Manhong