Re: [arch-dev-public] dropping luxrender packages
On Fri, 27 Jul 2018 at 20:31, Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public wrote: > > Le 27/07/2018 à 19:59, Lukas Jirkovsky via arch-dev-public a écrit : > > > Hi, > > I'd like to drop the luxrays, luxrender and luxblend25 packages from > > [community]. They have always required continuous attention to keep > > working which I can no longer provide with sufficient quality and > > right now the luxrender package is blocking the Python 3.7 rebuild. > > > > Moreover, the luxrender project has been abandoned and it was > > superseded by LuxCoreRender which has an active maintainer in AUR. > > > > If nobody steps in, I will remove them tomorrow. > > > > Lukas All packages dropped. > Please drop embree2 at the same time then, since luxrender was the only > remaining user. ;) Thanks for the reminder, I dropped that one, too Lukas
[arch-dev-public] jack rebuild required
Hey all, I've now created a realtime-privileges package to support a more general approach to acquiring realtime and rebuilt jack2 against those changes [2], making the aforementioned package an optional dependency for jack2 (while removing the redundant realtime settings). These changes are currently still in [community-testing]. As jack is in [extra], I'm unable to rebuild it with the changes, but I've prepared an update to its PKGBUILD [2]. I would be happy if some developer could rebuild jack with the updated build script and `svn rm jack.install, 40-hpet-permissions.rules, 99-audio.conf` before uploading. The changes have the benefit of outsourcing the settings, making it possible to reuse them in other applications, as previously discussed [3]. Best, David [1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-proaudio/2018-July/000163.html [2] https://pkgbuild.com/~dvzrv/extra/jack/PKGBUILD [3] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2018-February/029172.html -- https://sleepmap.de signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-dev-public] [arch-general] proposal to add "aurpublish" to community
On 07/22/2018 12:55 PM, Eli Schwartz wrote: > On 07/20/2018 04:23 AM, WorMzy Tykashi via arch-general wrote: >> On 20 July 2018 at 08:38, Jelle van der Waa wrote: >> >>> On 07/20/18 at 09:05am, Jelle van der Waa wrote: On 07/19/18 at 07:23pm, Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public wrote: > On Wed 18.07.18 - 15:28, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public wrote: >> I would like to add this to [community], but I'm unsure what people >> think about this; specifically, whether this might come too close to >> "supporting the AUR via [community] packages". Note that this is >>> *not* >> an AUR helper and is strictly a tool for package *maintainers* to use >> during the process of uploading. > > Uploaders are fine by me and I think we had one in previously. From what I can recall, we had one in, some discussion and it was gone again. I'll try to find the post in the archives. >>> >>> Gotcha, it was cower. [1] >>> >>> [1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010- >>> December/012763.html >>> >>> -- >>> Jelle van der Waa >>> >> >> (apologies for crosslist posting) >> >> For uploaders, there was 'burp' in [extra] which which was added without >> any serious opposition, and remained in the repos until shortly after AUR4 >> was launched (which made it redundant). See >> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2012-April/022787.html >> and https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/46210 >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> WorMzy > > So yeah, it seems like at least in the past there's been a distinction > made between uploaders (burp, aurpublish) and downloaders (cower). > > Anyway if no one has a serious objection by the end of the week I guess > I will add it. :) I've just added it to [community]. :) -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
