Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
Hello everyone, first time here! +1 for the mailing list. Looks reasonable. I would like to help as well. Let me know what's needed at this moment. Cheers! El dom., 15 de octubre de 2017 19:03, Rob Til Freedmen via arch-general < arch-general@archlinux.org> escribió: > Thanks to all of you taking care of this! > > I've PKGBUILD's for the following packages: > > sratom 0.6.0-1 > serd 0.28.0-1 > sord 0.16.0-1 > suil 0.8.4-1 > lilv 0.24.2-1 > liblo 1:0.29-1 > liblrdf 0.6.1-1 > swh-plugins 0.4.17-1 > vamp-plugin-sdk 2.7.1-1 > vamp-aubio-plugins 0.5.1 > zita-resampler 1.6.0-1 > > should be fairly straight > > aubio 0.4.5-1 has small fixes to the PKGBUILD > hydrogen 0.9.7-1 heavily patched > sonic-visualiser 3.0.3-1 added capnproto as inline build > > If I can help, please let me know. > -- jc
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
Thanks to all of you taking care of this! I've PKGBUILD's for the following packages: sratom 0.6.0-1 serd 0.28.0-1 sord 0.16.0-1 suil 0.8.4-1 lilv 0.24.2-1 liblo 1:0.29-1 liblrdf 0.6.1-1 swh-plugins 0.4.17-1 vamp-plugin-sdk 2.7.1-1 vamp-aubio-plugins 0.5.1 zita-resampler 1.6.0-1 should be fairly straight aubio 0.4.5-1 has small fixes to the PKGBUILD hydrogen 0.9.7-1 heavily patched sonic-visualiser 3.0.3-1 added capnproto as inline build If I can help, please let me know.
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 4:10 AM, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: > To David, Sebastian, Rob and anyone else curious: I would like to know > your opinion on Hydrogen. It made a release some time ago but its lrdf > support with raptor2 was broken. [1] > [1] https://github.com/hydrogen-music/hydrogen/issues/496 I've used a number of patches - sorted by increasing priority: fix_dtd_version.patch - needed to rebuild docs fix_python2.patch - use python2 in stats.py fix_missing_locale.patch - add missing ca locale fix_rubberband_path.patch - set default path fix_desktop_file.patch- desktop compliance fix_man_path.patch- set man path to /usr/share/man fix_cxx_flags.patch - propagate system cxx flags fix_raptor2.patch - cmake fails to get proper include path patches from debian 1000_portaudio_v2.patch - used to build with portmidi/porttime 1010-spelling.patch - convinced me
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 2017-10-15T15:03:15 +0200 sek...@posteo.se wrote: > > https://asb2m10.github.io/dexed/ > > FYI, dexed - ported to Linux - is part of distrho, so it would be best to > provide distrho altogether, it's nice to have! :-) Interesting! Thanks, I'd not heard of these at all. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com pgpEivLLOdpAj.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
* Mark Raynsford [14.10.2017 11:48]: On 2017-10-14T08:10:15 +0600 Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: - Mark Raynsford (packaging experience unknown) No experience besides some private packages that I didn't end up releasing to AUR. I'm intending to produce some packages of Dexed soon: https://asb2m10.github.io/dexed/ FYI, dexed - ported to Linux - is part of distrho, so it would be best to provide distrho altogether, it's nice to have! :-)
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 2017-10-14T08:10:15 +0600 Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: > > - Mark Raynsford (packaging experience unknown) No experience besides some private packages that I didn't end up releasing to AUR. I'm intending to produce some packages of Dexed soon: https://asb2m10.github.io/dexed/ -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com pgpyP11DSTFh7.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 08:10:15 +0600, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: >> I need another volunteer to administer and maintain an ML and >> anything else that you guys would like (forums, website, build >> machine, etc). Hi, I'm willing to moderate the mailing list, but don't know how long it would take to learn everything about maintaining a mailing list. It at least is good documented https://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/ . "Anything else" probably would be too much for my missing skills. >> I believe then the constant user feedback loop will help all of us >> keep packages and other stuff up-to-date and tested. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. Regards, Ralf -- Hahaha :D it's weekend, it just took a few seconds to find a culprit I missed under pressure of time https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/linux-rt/#comment-616385 .
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
Hey all, On October 14, 2017 4:10:15 AM GMT+02:00, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: >On 14 October 2017 at 06:51, Rashif Ray Rahman >wrote: >> Thanks for your support and interest. As I already have more than one >> proposal we can consider it taken care of, for packages in community. >> I will see how we can set up a dedicated mailing list since that's >> what folks seem to prefer here. >> >> But I need another volunteer to administer and maintain an ML and >> anything else that you guys would like (forums, website, build >> machine, etc). I believe then the constant user feedback loop will >> help all of us keep packages and other stuff up-to-date and tested. >> >> I will continue to maintain packages for extra and a few in community >> with a co-maintainer to help me (because I use them personally when I >> am booted into my Linux system). That co-maintainer can then also >> request another developer to apply changes in extra for any package >> that I am late in updating. >> >> Please let me know if this sounds like a plan. Yes. But also: are you thinking of a separate forum? Could this not be better dealt with within bbs? >To add on... > >Presently we have TU interest from (in order of date of contact with >me): > >- David Runge (approached me personally, contacted me in the past with >contributions) >- Leonidas Spyropoulos (approached me personally, but not a pro-audio >user) >- Sebastian Lau (pro-audio user, similar AUR activity as David) >- Mark Raynsford (packaging experience unknown) >- Marcelo "Marc" Ranolfi (no existing AUR packages) > >And I also know these folks as active pro-audio users for some time >now: > >- Ralf Mardorf (always saw the name in linux-audio ML, active >pro-audio user and thinker) >- Rob Til Freedmen (contacted me as far back as 2012, active pro-audio >user and contributor) > >There is another co-conspirator who used to lurk with me on #archaudio >and still maintains aur/linux-rt which I gave up a long time ago: > >- Joakim Hernberg Very important one! :-) >I am therefore making a decision based on who approached me directly >with interest to become a TU, with a record of contributions. Based on >that, I conclude that David will be better placed to apply for this, >but I do not have the time to check packaging-fu. I'd be happy to do it. Give me until Tuesday, as I'm currently still on vacation with spotty internet access. Can't properly test my out-of-dates until then ;-) >To David, Sebastian, Rob and anyone else curious: I would like to know >your opinion on Hydrogen. It made a release some time ago but its lrdf >support with raptor2 was broken. [1] > >I could (i) backport all changes as a non-trivial patch (because it >doesn't apply cleanly), (ii) move to a -git package making us track an >unstable build, or (iii) keep it out-of-date until upstream makes a >release. Let me know what you would do. Hmm, looking at the changes [1], I'd say (i), but that's me writing from a phone (and acknowledging that it's probably not the Arch way ;-) ). It shouldn't be too hard for them to go for a new release, but judging from their cycle I'd assume that's not any time soon (so better not go for iii). ii might lead to a new 'epoch' and other undesired side effects (instability, higher maintenance). Best, David [1] https://github.com/hydrogen-music/hydrogen/pull/508/files -- https://sleepmap.de
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 14 October 2017 at 06:51, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: > Thanks for your support and interest. As I already have more than one > proposal we can consider it taken care of, for packages in community. > I will see how we can set up a dedicated mailing list since that's > what folks seem to prefer here. > > But I need another volunteer to administer and maintain an ML and > anything else that you guys would like (forums, website, build > machine, etc). I believe then the constant user feedback loop will > help all of us keep packages and other stuff up-to-date and tested. > > I will continue to maintain packages for extra and a few in community > with a co-maintainer to help me (because I use them personally when I > am booted into my Linux system). That co-maintainer can then also > request another developer to apply changes in extra for any package > that I am late in updating. > > Please let me know if this sounds like a plan. To add on... Presently we have TU interest from (in order of date of contact with me): - David Runge (approached me personally, contacted me in the past with contributions) - Leonidas Spyropoulos (approached me personally, but not a pro-audio user) - Sebastian Lau (pro-audio user, similar AUR activity as David) - Mark Raynsford (packaging experience unknown) - Marcelo "Marc" Ranolfi (no existing AUR packages) And I also know these folks as active pro-audio users for some time now: - Ralf Mardorf (always saw the name in linux-audio ML, active pro-audio user and thinker) - Rob Til Freedmen (contacted me as far back as 2012, active pro-audio user and contributor) There is another co-conspirator who used to lurk with me on #archaudio and still maintains aur/linux-rt which I gave up a long time ago: - Joakim Hernberg I know these folks are very eager and helpful testers who provide feedback and try to contribute: - Insight Thekrab I am sorry if I missed anyone or any specifics. However, I cannot obviously sponsor everyone for TU candidacy or even know if some of them will be interested. I will stick to _one_ sponsorship for the purpose of helping with the pro-audio niche. I am therefore making a decision based on who approached me directly with interest to become a TU, with a record of contributions. Based on that, I conclude that David will be better placed to apply for this, but I do not have the time to check packaging-fu. Anyone is free to contact another dev or TU to apply for general package maintenance or to fill other areas. And, there is still need for administrative volunteers in case I can procure an ML (if unofficial), but that is based on what else you folks will like to have. To David, Sebastian, Rob and anyone else curious: I would like to know your opinion on Hydrogen. It made a release some time ago but its lrdf support with raptor2 was broken. [1] I could (i) backport all changes as a non-trivial patch (because it doesn't apply cleanly), (ii) move to a -git package making us track an unstable build, or (iii) keep it out-of-date until upstream makes a release. Let me know what you would do. [1] https://github.com/hydrogen-music/hydrogen/issues/496 -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 14 October 2017 at 01:58, Marcelo "Marc" Ranolfi via arch-general wrote: > Guys, > > Great to see this brought up here. > > I've been using Ardour 5.12 for quite a while now, along with recent > versions of some of the other packages listed. To be honest I've been > a little bit self-centered, checking out and updating packages to my > benefit using ABS. > > So I take this opportunity to volunteer as co-mantainer for ardour, > swh-plugins, hydrogen, zita-resampler, qtractor, qjackctl, qsynth, > jack2, and jack2-dbus. > > I know one pre-requisite is to "maintain a few packages in AUR" and I > have none. But I can set up some (or at least one package) if this is > a hard rule. Thanks for your support and interest. As I already have more than one proposal we can consider it taken care of, for packages in community. I will see how we can set up a dedicated mailing list since that's what folks seem to prefer here. But I need another volunteer to administer and maintain an ML and anything else that you guys would like (forums, website, build machine, etc). I believe then the constant user feedback loop will help all of us keep packages and other stuff up-to-date and tested. I will continue to maintain packages for extra and a few in community with a co-maintainer to help me (because I use them personally when I am booted into my Linux system). That co-maintainer can then also request another developer to apply changes in extra for any package that I am late in updating. Please let me know if this sounds like a plan. -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
Guys, Great to see this brought up here. I've been using Ardour 5.12 for quite a while now, along with recent versions of some of the other packages listed. To be honest I've been a little bit self-centered, checking out and updating packages to my benefit using ABS. So I take this opportunity to volunteer as co-mantainer for ardour, swh-plugins, hydrogen, zita-resampler, qtractor, qjackctl, qsynth, jack2, and jack2-dbus. I know one pre-requisite is to "maintain a few packages in AUR" and I have none. But I can set up some (or at least one package) if this is a hard rule. Regards Marc On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 19:25:37 +0600, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: >>It is NOT true that there is no pro-audio community. ArchAudio was >>just inactive because nobody stepped up to take over maintenance from >>me. It had a fully functioning website, forums, mailing list, and >>partially functioning packaging machine (I couldn't keep up the CentOS >>machine with the Arch changes). The admin Jon Kristian even was >>willing to spare the necessary infrastructure (he got a new Arch >>machine for us). People seemed to not want such a platform and >>advocated the AUR as being sufficient (see also LinuxMusicians >>forums). So if there's renewed interest, I can contact Jon again for a >>revival. > > Hi, > > I was interested to take over Arch audio, but due to an awkward duty > roster I had and still have got no time to do it. I should have got > enough time to moderate an audio mailing list, but without > having experiences with (mailman) administration. > > Regards, > Ralf
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 19:25:37 +0600, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote: >It is NOT true that there is no pro-audio community. ArchAudio was >just inactive because nobody stepped up to take over maintenance from >me. It had a fully functioning website, forums, mailing list, and >partially functioning packaging machine (I couldn't keep up the CentOS >machine with the Arch changes). The admin Jon Kristian even was >willing to spare the necessary infrastructure (he got a new Arch >machine for us). People seemed to not want such a platform and >advocated the AUR as being sufficient (see also LinuxMusicians >forums). So if there's renewed interest, I can contact Jon again for a >revival. Hi, I was interested to take over Arch audio, but due to an awkward duty roster I had and still have got no time to do it. I should have got enough time to moderate an audio mailing list, but without having experiences with (mailman) administration. Regards, Ralf
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
ray rashif , i thank you for your job around ardour , that i really use daily. In the last two years i've lost the pleasure of using your package, out to date for 10 mounths in a row too. I email you sometime in two years to tell you if you need help for testing/mantain an update arch ardour package. I totally agree to help (i renew my availability) about test/mantain ardour package, about a dedicated mailing list and i hope a very soon solution to unblock ardour's status and other audio packages. 2017-10-13 15:57 GMT+02:00, Giancarlo Razzolini : > Em outubro 13, 2017 10:25 Rashif Ray Rahman escreveu: >> >> - I still believe my extra packages I can somehow continue to update >> myself, as there has been talk about new servers which would make my >> life easier (sometimes my network latencies are so high to the build >> server I have to just quit and go do something else) >> > > We do have machines in many more places now, but they are mainly being > used as mirrors currently. Also, they don't have the same hardware as > the soyuz does. Having said that, some of them will be used for building > as well, so it's more a matter of finding the closest one to you (or with > the smallest amount of latency) and preparing it for receiving builds. > > Regards, > Giancarlo Razzolini >
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
Em outubro 13, 2017 10:25 Rashif Ray Rahman escreveu: - I still believe my extra packages I can somehow continue to update myself, as there has been talk about new servers which would make my life easier (sometimes my network latencies are so high to the build server I have to just quit and go do something else) We do have machines in many more places now, but they are mainly being used as mirrors currently. Also, they don't have the same hardware as the soyuz does. Having said that, some of them will be used for building as well, so it's more a matter of finding the closest one to you (or with the smallest amount of latency) and preparing it for receiving builds. Regards, Giancarlo Razzolini pgpXnddY16GNY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 13 October 2017 at 18:56, David Runge wrote: > On October 13, 2017 2:02:42 PM GMT+02:00, Mark Raynsford > wrote: >>I use Ardour daily. I'd like to volunteer to help, but I'm not sure >>what's involved. > In the case of Ardour luckily not much (see the other relevant thread on that > topic). > > Generally, I would love to see a set of maintainers responsible for audio > relevant packages, to better compensate the unavailability of one or more. > I understand, that pro-audio on Linux is somewhat niche and therefore also > niche on Arch. > However since archaudio is dead, it would be great to have pro-audio packages > in the main repositories. > IMHO the Arch wiki and an additional mailing list would be sufficient to deal > with its purposes. > > Best, > David > > P.S.: Now that I'm done with my thesis I start having a life and more time > for such things again ;-) > > -- > https://sleepmap.de Hello Folks! So, I am attacking a few points scattered throughout this thread: - It is true that I have been partially available for a long time, and Speps has been totally inactive. - It is true that even stuff I consider important myself gets updated not sooner than a month after release on average so far. - It is true that it serves no-one to delay updates in a rolling-release distribution and gives a bad impression of the team and inconveniences users. - Other developers and TUs are welcome to build and test my packages, and folks like Antonio have done that. It only gets to a problem when something doesn't build or work, and that's where it helps to have experience and familiarity with the niche topic of the packages (pro-audio). - I still believe my extra packages I can somehow continue to update myself, as there has been talk about new servers which would make my life easier (sometimes my network latencies are so high to the build server I have to just quit and go do something else) - My other problem is hardware and lack of time to set up my machine properly (that's why I am on Windows, and making do with Git Bash to be productive, but I am fully productive on my Linux box so I am definitely going to be active again at some point) - It is NOT true that there is no pro-audio community. ArchAudio was just inactive because nobody stepped up to take over maintenance from me. It had a fully functioning website, forums, mailing list, and partially functioning packaging machine (I couldn't keep up the CentOS machine with the Arch changes). The admin Jon Kristian even was willing to spare the necessary infrastructure (he got a new Arch machine for us). People seemed to not want such a platform and advocated the AUR as being sufficient (see also LinuxMusicians forums). So if there's renewed interest, I can contact Jon again for a revival. - I am more than happy to sponsor a TU, at least in place of Speps (btw, if Speps has not participated in TU voting, why hasn't the removal not been initiated?). So far I see we have two expressions of interest from David and Sebastian. David approached me some time ago but I have yet to reply. I am not sure it would be wise to sponsor more than one at a time, so I'll decide on some arbitrary objective and subjective metrics :) Thank you all for your support! Best, Ray -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On October 13, 2017 2:02:42 PM GMT+02:00, Mark Raynsford wrote: >I use Ardour daily. I'd like to volunteer to help, but I'm not sure >what's involved. In the case of Ardour luckily not much (see the other relevant thread on that topic). Generally, I would love to see a set of maintainers responsible for audio relevant packages, to better compensate the unavailability of one or more. I understand, that pro-audio on Linux is somewhat niche and therefore also niche on Arch. However since archaudio is dead, it would be great to have pro-audio packages in the main repositories. IMHO the Arch wiki and an additional mailing list would be sufficient to deal with its purposes. Best, David P.S.: Now that I'm done with my thesis I start having a life and more time for such things again ;-) -- https://sleepmap.de
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 2017-10-13T01:02:54 +0200 Rob Til Freedmen via arch-general wrote: > ... for these long outdated packages? > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=schiv&flagged=Flagged > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=speps&flagged=Flagged I use Ardour daily. I'd like to volunteer to help, but I'm not sure what's involved. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
> Original Message > Subject: Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ... > Local Time: October 13, 2017 9:01 AM > UTC Time: October 13, 2017 7:01 AM > From: arch-general@archlinux.org > To: arch-general@archlinux.org > Leonidas Spyropoulos > > On 13/10/17, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:02:54 +0200, Rob Til Freedmen wrote: >> >... for these long outdated packages? >> > >> >https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=schiv&flagged=Flagged >> > >> >https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=speps&flagged=Flagged > > Hello, > > I can adopt few if they drop to AUR (of if I get sponsor to apply for a > TU). > > Regards, > Leonidas > > -- > Leonidas Spyropoulos > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > Q: Why is it such a bad thing? > A: Top-posting. > Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? Maybe there should be rule for automatic orphaning packages that are flagged for more than 6 months? With notification for maintainer couple of days before. After that if no one is interested in adopting them for some additional time they could be moved to AUR. Having long time outdated packages do more harm than not having them at all in repos as they can't be served in AUR and users have to deal with them on their own. Jordan
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
Hey all, On October 13, 2017 11:08:21 AM GMT+02:00, Antonio Rojas wrote: >El Fri, 13 Oct 2017 10:35:21 +0200, Sebastian Lau via arch-general >escribió: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I can adopt few if they drop to AUR (of if I get sponsor to apply >for a >>> TU). >>> >>> Regards, >>> Leonidas >>> >>> >> Hello, >> >> I would do the same for a few of that listed packages under the same >> circumstances (a drop to AUR or finding a sponsor to apply for a TU). I too would like to help out and apply for TU if possible. Wrote to schiv for that, but he seems very busy. At least liblo 0.29 is now pushed to testing, happy to see that :-) In any case, I think it would be very much preferable to keep all those packages in community and not have them drop to AUR. >My >> current packages in AUR are listed here: >> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/? >O=0&SeB=m&K=nullptr_t&outdated=&SB=n&SO=a&PP=50&do_Search=Go >> . Mine are here: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=m&K=dvzrv&outdated=&SB=n&SO=a&PP=50&do_Search=Go (Some outdated, on vacation right now). >I suggest you guys contact schiv or speps directly about the >possibility >of sponsoring you to help comaintain the audio packages in [community]. >I >agree that the current situation is really bad, with both maintainers >partially (one of them totally) inactive. From my attempts to contact speps (no reply through mail or xmpp over several months), I would suggest moving all of his packages to the hands of other maintainers asap. +1 for a mailing list. Best, David -- https://sleepmap.de
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 13.10.2017 11:14, Jelle van der Waa wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/13/17 at 10:35am, Sebastian Lau via arch-general wrote: >> On 13.10.2017 09:01, Leonidas Spyropoulos via arch-general wrote: >>> On 13/10/17, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:02:54 +0200, Rob Til Freedmen wrote: > ... for these long outdated packages? > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=schiv&flagged=Flagged > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=speps&flagged=Flagged >>> Hello, > As a Dev/TU I refrain from updating these outdated flagged packages, since I > have no idea how to test and check if it works. The packages are a quite > specific nice. > >>> I can adopt few if they drop to AUR (of if I get sponsor to apply for a >>> TU). > It would be nice, if someone with audio packaging experience and real life > user > would join the team. Hi, I also record music without publishing (with UbuntuStudio until now, which includes a superset of that packages), so I'd be in stand to test the functionality of that packages. Regards, Sebastian
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
Hi, On 10/13/17 at 10:35am, Sebastian Lau via arch-general wrote: > On 13.10.2017 09:01, Leonidas Spyropoulos via arch-general wrote: > > On 13/10/17, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > >> On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:02:54 +0200, Rob Til Freedmen wrote: > >>> ... for these long outdated packages? > >>> > >>> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=schiv&flagged=Flagged > >>> > >>> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=speps&flagged=Flagged > > Hello, As a Dev/TU I refrain from updating these outdated flagged packages, since I have no idea how to test and check if it works. The packages are a quite specific nice. > > I can adopt few if they drop to AUR (of if I get sponsor to apply for a > > TU). It would be nice, if someone with audio packaging experience and real life user would join the team. > I would do the same for a few of that listed packages under the same > circumstances (a drop to AUR or finding a sponsor to apply for a TU). My > current packages in AUR are listed here: > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=m&K=nullptr_t&outdated=&SB=n&SO=a&PP=50&do_Search=Go > . > > If I would get a sponsor for applying as a TU, I would like to migrate > plymouth (no AUR dependencies) to [community] or [extra], when current > issues are patched. It is widely used and got a recent update from > upstream (even if I think, the next update from upstream will take a > while, most of my releases address community issues). A Tu can't access [extra] btw. > Also, I'd like to have an audio mailing list (wether official or not) > for discussion on that audio packages. You're free to setup one or extend the wiki :-) I would advice you both to find a TU to sponsor you! -- Jelle van der Waa signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
El Fri, 13 Oct 2017 10:35:21 +0200, Sebastian Lau via arch-general escribió: >> Hello, >> >> I can adopt few if they drop to AUR (of if I get sponsor to apply for a >> TU). >> >> Regards, >> Leonidas >> >> > Hello, > > I would do the same for a few of that listed packages under the same > circumstances (a drop to AUR or finding a sponsor to apply for a TU). My > current packages in AUR are listed here: > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/? O=0&SeB=m&K=nullptr_t&outdated=&SB=n&SO=a&PP=50&do_Search=Go > . I suggest you guys contact schiv or speps directly about the possibility of sponsoring you to help comaintain the audio packages in [community]. I agree that the current situation is really bad, with both maintainers partially (one of them totally) inactive.
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 13.10.2017 09:01, Leonidas Spyropoulos via arch-general wrote: > On 13/10/17, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:02:54 +0200, Rob Til Freedmen wrote: >>> ... for these long outdated packages? >>> >>> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=schiv&flagged=Flagged >>> >>> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=speps&flagged=Flagged > Hello, > > I can adopt few if they drop to AUR (of if I get sponsor to apply for a > TU). > > Regards, > Leonidas > Hello, I would do the same for a few of that listed packages under the same circumstances (a drop to AUR or finding a sponsor to apply for a TU). My current packages in AUR are listed here: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&SeB=m&K=nullptr_t&outdated=&SB=n&SO=a&PP=50&do_Search=Go . If I would get a sponsor for applying as a TU, I would like to migrate plymouth (no AUR dependencies) to [community] or [extra], when current issues are patched. It is widely used and got a recent update from upstream (even if I think, the next update from upstream will take a while, most of my releases address community issues). Also, I'd like to have an audio mailing list (wether official or not) for discussion on that audio packages. Regards, Sebastian
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On 13/10/17, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:02:54 +0200, Rob Til Freedmen wrote: > >... for these long outdated packages? > > > >https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=schiv&flagged=Flagged > > > >https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=speps&flagged=Flagged Hello, I can adopt few if they drop to AUR (of if I get sponsor to apply for a TU). Regards, Leonidas -- Leonidas Spyropoulos A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is it such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Re: [arch-general] Can we please have a co-maintainer ...
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 01:02:54 +0200, Rob Til Freedmen wrote: >... for these long outdated packages? > >https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=schiv&flagged=Flagged > >https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update&q=&maintainer=speps&flagged=Flagged Hi, the real problem IMO is, that we don't have an active Arch audio mailing list anymore. Yesterday and today I missuesed AUR comments as a replacement for the Arch audio mailing list. If we would have an active audio related Arch mailing list, we could help each other to update packages. Regards, Ralf -- https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/linux-rt/?comments=all ;)
