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
<beardedlinuxg...@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 <charlesb...@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 <korr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Rob McCathie <korr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Charles Bos <charlesb...@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 <r...@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.
