Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Gergely Imreh  wrote:

> 2009/6/25 Grigorios Bouzakis :
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Loui Chang 
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed 24 Jun 2009 23:53 +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> >> > why not allow the maintainers in unsupported to delete comments for
> their
> >> > packages, I don't think it will be too much misused? I remove from
> time
> >> to
> >> > time the crap out of the comments in my community/aur packages  so
> only
> >> the
> >> > more relevant things stay (if there are any).
> >>
> >> Yeah I think this idea is best out of the lot.
> >>
> >
> > Yeah it is a nice idea, only i dont think people are gonna spend time
> > deleting comments.
> >
> > Usually when a somewhat popular package gets uploaded theres a lot of
> > discussion about
> > how to do this & that etc. Then when the script reaches a fairly
> satisfying
> > point of decency
> > discussion stops. & then you mostly see comments like "1.2 is out" or
> > complete build scripts
> > or patches posted etc.
> > See for example http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24266
> >
> > IMO its better that the first, and more important part of the discussion
> to
> > be done on the mailing
> > list, this way people who dont use the package can help.
> > People can also get familiar with the package that way.
> > Then email the maintainer directly.
> >
>
>
> Hi,
>
>  I think there are way larger number of people maintaining packages
> in the "unsupported" than how many people are on this mailing list.
>

Thats true. The discussion could also be moved to the bbs, I guess more
people visit that.


>
>  In "unsupported" I don't agree with removing comments, or even
> deleting them for that matter. This is because the comments provide
> invaluable resource for information in one place.
>  Adopted a neglected package that is way out of date? Look among the
> comments and more likely than not someone already did some
> modifications that made it work but didn't want to adopt the package.
> That would be a pain to find (even if you want to look for it) in a
> mailing list. And if the mail goes only to the developer, then it's
> all gone when they ignore it.


Then he/she should adopt the package and fix the script. Or contact the
maintainer
to fix it instead.
Not post a comment. The AUR is not of forum, but in many cases it resembles
one.


>  Or bugs? How many "unsupported" maintainer would read the bug
> tracker to look for their own packages if someone filed a bug? Place a
> comment, and it's in one place, even get a notification.


I am not suggesting that.


> There's a
> reason why packages are in "unsupported" and not higher up I think
> the current "notify" and "flag" buttons are adequate for the most
> "hobby maintainers".


I dont know what reason you are reffering to, i can only guess you are
talking
about the quality of the scripts.
Well for what its worth, application developers seem to be agree
with you.
But dont forget that unsupported currecntly has 15000 scripts, Lets say that
1 of
them are unique. That is still 2,5 times more than the size of all binary
repositories together.


>  For "community", that's of course a different matter, just get rid
> of comments and force people to file bugs. Maybe that will improve the
> standards in the "unsupported" as well.
>
>   Cheers,
>  Greg
>


-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] [arch-dev-public] Status of arch=any ?

[Allan McRae]

Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:

2009/6/24 Aaron Griffin :
  

Which part? Is there a patch I forgot to merge, or are you just
bumping the dbscripts as a whole?




No, I was just saying that the any architecture could be tried
out for the kde-unstable branch to find any remaining bugs.
  


I discussed this with Pierre yesterday.  The issues are that 
kde-unstable does not use the db-scripts as such and there is no real 
arch="any" packages there.


Allan

Re: [aur-general] [arch-dev-public] Status of arch=any ?

[Abhishek Dasgupta]

2009/6/24 Aaron Griffin :
> Which part? Is there a patch I forgot to merge, or are you just
> bumping the dbscripts as a whole?
>

No, I was just saying that the any architecture could be tried
out for the kde-unstable branch to find any remaining bugs.

-- 
Abhishek

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Gergely Imreh]

2009/6/25 Grigorios Bouzakis :
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Loui Chang  wrote:
>
>> On Wed 24 Jun 2009 23:53 +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
>> > why not allow the maintainers in unsupported to delete comments for their
>> > packages, I don't think it will be too much misused? I remove from time
>> to
>> > time the crap out of the comments in my community/aur packages  so only
>> the
>> > more relevant things stay (if there are any).
>>
>> Yeah I think this idea is best out of the lot.
>>
>
> Yeah it is a nice idea, only i dont think people are gonna spend time
> deleting comments.
>
> Usually when a somewhat popular package gets uploaded theres a lot of
> discussion about
> how to do this & that etc. Then when the script reaches a fairly satisfying
> point of decency
> discussion stops. & then you mostly see comments like "1.2 is out" or
> complete build scripts
> or patches posted etc.
> See for example http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24266
>
> IMO its better that the first, and more important part of the discussion to
> be done on the mailing
> list, this way people who dont use the package can help.
> People can also get familiar with the package that way.
> Then email the maintainer directly.
>


Hi,

  I think there are way larger number of people maintaining packages
in the "unsupported" than how many people are on this mailing list.

  In "unsupported" I don't agree with removing comments, or even
deleting them for that matter. This is because the comments provide
invaluable resource for information in one place.
  Adopted a neglected package that is way out of date? Look among the
comments and more likely than not someone already did some
modifications that made it work but didn't want to adopt the package.
That would be a pain to find (even if you want to look for it) in a
mailing list. And if the mail goes only to the developer, then it's
all gone when they ignore it.
  Or bugs? How many "unsupported" maintainer would read the bug
tracker to look for their own packages if someone filed a bug? Place a
comment, and it's in one place, even get a notification. There's a
reason why packages are in "unsupported" and not higher up I think
the current "notify" and "flag" buttons are adequate for the most
"hobby maintainers".

  For "community", that's of course a different matter, just get rid
of comments and force people to file bugs. Maybe that will improve the
standards in the "unsupported" as well.

   Cheers,
  Greg

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Allan McRae]

Eric Bélanger wrote:

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
  

Aaron Griffin wrote:


On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Pierre Schmitz
wrote:

  

On Wednesday 24 June 2009 21:18:25 Eric Bélanger wrote:



I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
AUR/community move is done.

  

I would prefer a strategy which wont block "our" repos. For example I
have php
waiting in testing and Allan mentioned a libjpeg rebuild.

There are only a few packages in community which need a readline rebuild.
So
what about moving the readline rebuild very soon (tomorrow), commit the
needed
rebuild for community and then freeze it.

During the community transition we have an "empty" testing to play with
libjpeg and others.



Yeah. Considering that the libjpeg updates may be much larger, let's
plan on having community-testing ready for that rebuild. How does that
sound?

  

Just noting that that libjpeg being large is wrong as far as community goes:
84 rebuilds in community for readline
31 rebuilds in community for libjpeg




Are you sure about that? From a quick glance at the bug reports, it
seems to be the opposite:
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15165
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15222
  


Haha, I suck!  Never deal with emails first thing in the morning...

Allan

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Eric Bélanger]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Pierre Schmitz
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 24 June 2009 21:18:25 Eric Bélanger wrote:
>>>

 I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
 AUR/community move is done.

>>>
>>> I would prefer a strategy which wont block "our" repos. For example I
>>> have php
>>> waiting in testing and Allan mentioned a libjpeg rebuild.
>>>
>>> There are only a few packages in community which need a readline rebuild.
>>> So
>>> what about moving the readline rebuild very soon (tomorrow), commit the
>>> needed
>>> rebuild for community and then freeze it.
>>>
>>> During the community transition we have an "empty" testing to play with
>>> libjpeg and others.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah. Considering that the libjpeg updates may be much larger, let's
>> plan on having community-testing ready for that rebuild. How does that
>> sound?
>>
>
> Just noting that that libjpeg being large is wrong as far as community goes:
> 84 rebuilds in community for readline
> 31 rebuilds in community for libjpeg
>

Are you sure about that? From a quick glance at the bug reports, it
seems to be the opposite:
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15165
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15222


>
> But as Pierre pointed out, we can not hold up moving readline for this as
> php needs to get out of [testing].  I am happy waiting many days to start
> libjpeg...
>
> Allan
>
>
>

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Aaron Griffin]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> Just noting that that libjpeg being large is wrong as far as community goes:
> 84 rebuilds in community for readline
> 31 rebuilds in community for libjpeg

Yeesh, I wasn't aware - I thought it was only around 20 packages or so

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Allan McRae]

Aaron Griffin wrote:

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
  

On Wednesday 24 June 2009 21:18:25 Eric Bélanger wrote:


I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
AUR/community move is done.
  

I would prefer a strategy which wont block "our" repos. For example I have php
waiting in testing and Allan mentioned a libjpeg rebuild.

There are only a few packages in community which need a readline rebuild. So
what about moving the readline rebuild very soon (tomorrow), commit the needed
rebuild for community and then freeze it.

During the community transition we have an "empty" testing to play with
libjpeg and others.



Yeah. Considering that the libjpeg updates may be much larger, let's
plan on having community-testing ready for that rebuild. How does that
sound?
  


Just noting that that libjpeg being large is wrong as far as community goes:
84 rebuilds in community for readline
31 rebuilds in community for libjpeg


But as Pierre pointed out, we can not hold up moving readline for this 
as php needs to get out of [testing].  I am happy waiting many days to 
start libjpeg...


Allan

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Eric Bélanger]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 June 2009 21:18:25 Eric Bélanger wrote:
>>> I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
>>> AUR/community move is done.
>>
>> I would prefer a strategy which wont block "our" repos. For example I have 
>> php
>> waiting in testing and Allan mentioned a libjpeg rebuild.
>>
>> There are only a few packages in community which need a readline rebuild. So
>> what about moving the readline rebuild very soon (tomorrow), commit the 
>> needed
>> rebuild for community and then freeze it.
>>
>> During the community transition we have an "empty" testing to play with
>> libjpeg and others.
>
> Yeah. Considering that the libjpeg updates may be much larger, let's
> plan on having community-testing ready for that rebuild. How does that
> sound?
>

sounds good.

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Loui Chang  wrote:

> On Wed 24 Jun 2009 23:53 +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> > why not allow the maintainers in unsupported to delete comments for their
> > packages, I don't think it will be too much misused? I remove from time
> to
> > time the crap out of the comments in my community/aur packages  so only
> the
> > more relevant things stay (if there are any).
>
> Yeah I think this idea is best out of the lot.
>

Yeah it is a nice idea, only i dont think people are gonna spend time
deleting comments.

Usually when a somewhat popular package gets uploaded theres a lot of
discussion about
how to do this & that etc. Then when the script reaches a fairly satisfying
point of decency
discussion stops. & then you mostly see comments like "1.2 is out" or
complete build scripts
or patches posted etc.
See for example http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=24266

IMO its better that the first, and more important part of the discussion to
be done on the mailing
list, this way people who dont use the package can help.
People can also get familiar with the package that way.
Then email the maintainer directly.

-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Daenyth Blank]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 18:58, Loui Chang wrote:
> On Wed 24 Jun 2009 23:53 +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
>> why not allow the maintainers in unsupported to delete comments for their
>> packages, I don't think it will be too much misused? I remove from time to
>> time the crap out of the comments in my community/aur packages  so only the
>> more relevant things stay (if there are any).
>
> Yeah I think this idea is best out of the lot.
>

+1 from me.

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Loui Chang]

On Wed 24 Jun 2009 23:53 +0200, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> why not allow the maintainers in unsupported to delete comments for their
> packages, I don't think it will be too much misused? I remove from time to
> time the crap out of the comments in my community/aur packages  so only the
> more relevant things stay (if there are any).

Yeah I think this idea is best out of the lot.

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:58 AM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Loui Chang  wrote:
>
>> On Thu 25 Jun 2009 00:43 +0300, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>> > Maybe the maintainer should be able to add comments then?
>> > Instead of having 100 user comments out of which 5-10, at best, are
>> relevant
>> > and useful.
>> > eg. One package needs -Sf cause its a custom kernel or something
>> > I email the maintainer and he adds it to his notes.
>>
>> So you're asking that comments be changed to 'Report a bug?' or what?
>>
>
> No, the way i thought of this was for example a box like the one saying
> "Enter your comment below."
> that instead says "Package Notes.
>

Sorry i sent this by accident. This would replace the comment box and it
would be editable only by the maintainer.
The user would still have to email the maintainer for any issues.



-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Loui Chang  wrote:

> On Thu 25 Jun 2009 00:43 +0300, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> > Maybe the maintainer should be able to add comments then?
> > Instead of having 100 user comments out of which 5-10, at best, are
> relevant
> > and useful.
> > eg. One package needs -Sf cause its a custom kernel or something
> > I email the maintainer and he adds it to his notes.
>
> So you're asking that comments be changed to 'Report a bug?' or what?
>

No, the way i thought of this was for example a box like the one saying
"Enter your comment below."
that instead says "Package Notes.

-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Aaron Griffin]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 June 2009 21:18:25 Eric Bélanger wrote:
>> I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
>> AUR/community move is done.
>
> I would prefer a strategy which wont block "our" repos. For example I have php
> waiting in testing and Allan mentioned a libjpeg rebuild.
>
> There are only a few packages in community which need a readline rebuild. So
> what about moving the readline rebuild very soon (tomorrow), commit the needed
> rebuild for community and then freeze it.
>
> During the community transition we have an "empty" testing to play with
> libjpeg and others.

Yeah. Considering that the libjpeg updates may be much larger, let's
plan on having community-testing ready for that rebuild. How does that
sound?

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Loui Chang]

On Thu 25 Jun 2009 00:43 +0300, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> Maybe the maintainer should be able to add comments then?
> Instead of having 100 user comments out of which 5-10, at best, are relevant
> and useful.
> eg. One package needs -Sf cause its a custom kernel or something
> I email the maintainer and he adds it to his notes.

So you're asking that comments be changed to 'Report a bug?' or what?

That's what they're used for 90% of the time in my experience.
For bug reporting, and follow up and "It works now, thanks for fixing."

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Ronald van Haren]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Daenyth Blank

> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:43, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> > Maybe the maintainer should be able to add comments then?
> > Instead of having 100 user comments out of which 5-10, at best, are
> relevant
> > and useful.
> > eg. One package needs -Sf cause its a custom kernel or something
> > I email the maintainer and he adds it to his notes.
> >
> > --
> > Greg
> >
>
> I would be alright with this... Perhaps a setting like controllable by
> the maintainer that says "allow comments"?
>

why not allow the maintainers in unsupported to delete comments for their
packages, I don't think it will be too much misused? I remove from time to
time the crap out of the comments in my community/aur packages  so only the
more relevant things stay (if there are any).



On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Daenyth Blank

> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:36, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> > yes AUR can notify you at new comments, there is a checkbox. Point is
> that
> > the bug tracker is much easier as you can track bugs much easier. In AUR
> you
> > get notified once and forget about it if you're busy at that moment.
> >
> > Ronald
> >
>
> For community packages this is true, but where does that leave
> packages in unsupported?


I don't want to remove comments from them if that is what you mean. See my
comment above.

Ronald

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:45 AM, Daenyth Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:43, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>> Maybe the maintainer should be able to add comments then?
>> Instead of having 100 user comments out of which 5-10, at best, are relevant
>> and useful.
>> eg. One package needs -Sf cause its a custom kernel or something
>> I email the maintainer and he adds it to his notes.
>>
>> --
>> Greg
>>
>
> I would be alright with this... Perhaps a setting like controllable by
> the maintainer that says "allow comments"?
>

I have no problem with extra options, but i imagine that this would
increase complexity in the code.
I hear a patches welcome coming my way :P
Anyway i think both of my suggestions are easy to implemend and viable.

-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Daenyth Blank]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:43, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> Maybe the maintainer should be able to add comments then?
> Instead of having 100 user comments out of which 5-10, at best, are relevant
> and useful.
> eg. One package needs -Sf cause its a custom kernel or something
> I email the maintainer and he adds it to his notes.
>
> --
> Greg
>

I would be alright with this... Perhaps a setting like controllable by
the maintainer that says "allow comments"?

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Ronald van Haren  wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis  >wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Daenyth Blank
> >  <
> daenyth%2ba...@gmail.com ><
> > daenyth%2ba...@gmail.com  <
> daenyth%252ba...@gmail.com >>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:03, Grigorios Bouzakis
> > wrote:
> > > > May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
> > > > Disable comments on AUR completely.
> >
>
> > Anyway my suggestion was about unsupported. I thought (but maybe i was
> > mistaking) that you guys
>
>
> I'd rather not have all discussions about AUR packages on this list, I've
> already quite a few mailing lists to folow and I imagine the way you
> propose
> aur-general would become a high-trafic mailing list.
>

Maybe the maintainer should be able to add comments then?
Instead of having 100 user comments out of which 5-10, at best, are relevant
and useful.
eg. One package needs -Sf cause its a custom kernel or something
I email the maintainer and he adds it to his notes.

-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Daenyth Blank]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:36, Ronald van Haren wrote:
> yes AUR can notify you at new comments, there is a checkbox. Point is that
> the bug tracker is much easier as you can track bugs much easier. In AUR you
> get notified once and forget about it if you're busy at that moment.
>
> Ronald
>

For community packages this is true, but where does that leave
packages in unsupported?

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Ronald van Haren]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Andrei Thorp  wrote:

> Relatedly, can AUR notify you whenever a package of yours gets a new
> comment? I don't think I get these.
> --



yes AUR can notify you at new comments, there is a checkbox. Point is that
the bug tracker is much easier as you can track bugs much easier. In AUR you
get notified once and forget about it if you're busy at that moment.

Ronald

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Andrei Thorp  wrote:

> Relatedly, can AUR notify you whenever a package of yours gets a new
> comment? I don't think I get these.
> --
> Andrei Thorp, Developer: Xandros Corp. (http://www.xandros.com)
>
>  eat Depends: cook | eat-out.
>   But eat-out is non-free so that's out.
>   And cook Recommends: clean-pans.
>-- Seen on #Debian
>

Yes it does. You should press the notify button.

-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Ronald van Haren]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Daenyth Blank
> <
> daenyth%2ba...@gmail.com >
> > wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:03, Grigorios Bouzakis
> wrote:
> > > May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
> > > Disable comments on AUR completely.
>

> Anyway my suggestion was about unsupported. I thought (but maybe i was
> mistaking) that you guys


I'd rather not have all discussions about AUR packages on this list, I've
already quite a few mailing lists to folow and I imagine the way you propose
aur-general would become a high-trafic mailing list.


> (TUs) had already decided to disable comments on community already the last
> time this was brought up.
>

 yes I think we did.

Ronald

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Andrei Thorp]

Relatedly, can AUR notify you whenever a package of yours gets a new
comment? I don't think I get these.
-- 
Andrei Thorp, Developer: Xandros Corp. (http://www.xandros.com)

 eat Depends: cook | eat-out.
   But eat-out is non-free so that's out.
   And cook Recommends: clean-pans.
-- Seen on #Debian

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Ronald van Haren]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:

> On Wednesday 24 June 2009 21:18:25 Eric Bélanger wrote:
> > I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
> > AUR/community move is done.
>
> I would prefer a strategy which wont block "our" repos. For example I have
> php
> waiting in testing and Allan mentioned a libjpeg rebuild.
>
> There are only a few packages in community which need a readline rebuild.
> So
> what about moving the readline rebuild very soon (tomorrow), commit the
> needed
> rebuild for community and then freeze it.
>
> During the community transition we have an "empty" testing to play with
> libjpeg and others.
>
> --
>
> Pierre Schmitz, 
> http://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
>

that seems fine. We should be able to do the readline rebuilds for community
in notime with a few people, it are only a few packages.
Having the community repo switched over sometime during the libjpeg rebuilds
is more important as I imagine this will be a whole lot more packages.


Ronald

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Loui Chang]

On Thu 25 Jun 2009 00:03 +0300, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
> Disable comments on AUR completely.
> I dont think there is a question about its usefulness in [community],
> not even TU's themselves
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=8737
> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15126
> or developers http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=13315
> http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15127
> bother making (formal) bug reports in the convinience of an (informal)
> comment.
>
> If someone wants to comment on a package he should use this mailing list.
> That will generate much more traffic here.

Community is a bit of a Franken-repo, so it exists in both worlds of the
AUR and binary repos. In the near future community will be using the
same system as the official repos, and will be entirely removed from the
AUR. So there'll be no more comments for community packages.

Cheers.

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Daenyth Blank

> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:03, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> > May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
> > Disable comments on AUR completely.
>
> I agree that comments are not terribly useful on community packages,
> but I think they're important for [unsupported]. Maybe for community
> packages, only allow comments from the *maintainer* (or TU). My
> preference is to leave it as is. Granted, sometimes people report
> issues for community packages on the comment page, but that's no worse
> than people emailing the maintainer directly (since that's still not
> on the bug tracker), and is better because it's more visible.
>


I disagree on the "not being worst" part.
If Sergej who currently maintains more than 40% of the repo on his own read
the comments
on his packages, i imagine he would spend his life reading comments.
See for example the link with brain0's comment. "Reported" as a comment on
June 1st, fixed: never
reported in the bug tracker on the 16th. fixed on the 19th.
And from personal experience i can tell you that he fixes ASAP all the bugs
reported to him directly
by email.

Anyway my suggestion was about unsupported. I thought (but maybe i was
mistaking) that you guys
(TUs) had already decided to disable comments on community already the last
time this was brought up.

-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Pierre Schmitz]

On Wednesday 24 June 2009 21:18:25 Eric Bélanger wrote:
> I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
> AUR/community move is done.

I would prefer a strategy which wont block "our" repos. For example I have php 
waiting in testing and Allan mentioned a libjpeg rebuild.

There are only a few packages in community which need a readline rebuild. So 
what about moving the readline rebuild very soon (tomorrow), commit the needed 
rebuild for community and then freeze it.

During the community transition we have an "empty" testing to play with 
libjpeg and others.

-- 

Pierre Schmitz, http://users.archlinux.de/~pierre

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Aaron Griffin]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Daenyth Blank wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:03, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>>> May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
>>> Disable comments on AUR completely.
>>
>> I agree that comments are not terribly useful on community packages,
>> but I think they're important for [unsupported]. Maybe for community
>> packages, only allow comments from the *maintainer* (or TU). My
>> preference is to leave it as is. Granted, sometimes people report
>> issues for community packages on the comment page, but that's no worse
>> than people emailing the maintainer directly (since that's still not
>> on the bug tracker), and is better because it's more visible.
>
> Without sounding harsh - it's not my job. We've always harped on the
> point that the TUs and community was an autonomous entity. What we are
> doing here is enabling that even more so. If the TUs and/or AUR guys
> want to disable comments, that's their prerogative, but there's no way
> in hell I'm going to add "oh and fiddle with some PHP while we're at
> it" to the list of things to do here.

Note, this reply was to Dolby's original comment in the other thread -
it looks goofy the way I replied here

Re: [aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Aaron Griffin]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Daenyth Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:03, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
>> May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
>> Disable comments on AUR completely.
>
> I agree that comments are not terribly useful on community packages,
> but I think they're important for [unsupported]. Maybe for community
> packages, only allow comments from the *maintainer* (or TU). My
> preference is to leave it as is. Granted, sometimes people report
> issues for community packages on the comment page, but that's no worse
> than people emailing the maintainer directly (since that's still not
> on the bug tracker), and is better because it's more visible.

Without sounding harsh - it's not my job. We've always harped on the
point that the TUs and community was an autonomous entity. What we are
doing here is enabling that even more so. If the TUs and/or AUR guys
want to disable comments, that's their prerogative, but there's no way
in hell I'm going to add "oh and fiddle with some PHP while we're at
it" to the list of things to do here.

[aur-general] Removing comments from AUR

[Daenyth Blank]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 17:03, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
> Disable comments on AUR completely.

I agree that comments are not terribly useful on community packages,
but I think they're important for [unsupported]. Maybe for community
packages, only allow comments from the *maintainer* (or TU). My
preference is to leave it as is. Granted, sometimes people report
issues for community packages on the comment page, but that's no worse
than people emailing the maintainer directly (since that's still not
on the bug tracker), and is better because it's more visible.

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Daenyth Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 15:59, Aaron Griffin wrote:
 Anything I'm missing? Suggestions as to a good date?
>
> Sounds good to me. I don't have any requests for a specific date.
> Looking forward to the improvements :)
>

May i suggest something slightly relevant, but probably very radical?
Disable comments on AUR completely.
I dont think there is a question about its usefulness in [community],
not even TU's themselves
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=8737
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15126
or developers http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=13315
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15127
bother making (formal) bug reports in the convinience of an (informal) comment.

If someone wants to comment on a package he should use this mailing list.
That will generate much more traffic here.

-- 
Greg

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Eric Bélanger]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Eric Bélanger wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Aaron Griffin 
>> wrote:
>>> Hey all,
>>> This is part informational, and part not.
>>>
>>> We have a donated server from SevenL networks that has sat mostly
>>> unused up until now. What we would like to do is more the AUR and
>>> community on to that machine, so that TUs can get real (limited) shell
>>> accounts and the people managing this side of the project get a bit
>>> more control.
>>>
>>> As far as I know, things are almost ready to go, but what we need to
>>> do is setup a good time to "freeze" the AUR and community so we can
>>> switch over the DNS and change checkout locations.
>>>
>>> Once this is complete, we can move forward with switching community to
>>> SVN and using the official dbscripts for managing the repo. This way
>>> you guys can get your own testing repo too!
>>>
>>> Sooo... the list, as I see it:
>>> * Decide on a date and time for the move
>>> * Get SSH keys from all TUs
>>> * Switch DNS over
>>> * Disable the AUR/community on gerolde
>>>
>>> Anything I'm missing? Suggestions as to a good date?
>>>
>>
>>
>> I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
>> AUR/community move is done. So we could do the community readline
>> rebuild (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15165) in the new
>> community-testing repo then move everything to core/extra/community
>> once it's done.
>
> I was thinking of a bit longer timeline for the SVN switchover. In my
> head I had: move machines sometime this week, do the svn transition
> next week. Is that too long?

That's not too long IMO. The first mention of that readline rebuild
was a few months ago. So it doesn't matter much if it stays in testing
for another week or two.

>
>>  If we go this way, I suggest doing the move  very soon (this week or
>> next week) as we want to complete the readline rebuild so we could
>> start the massive libjpeg rebuild. The timing of the AUR/community
>> move couldn't be better.
>

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Daenyth Blank]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 15:59, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>>> Anything I'm missing? Suggestions as to a good date?

Sounds good to me. I don't have any requests for a specific date.
Looking forward to the improvements :)

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Aaron Griffin]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Eric Bélanger wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> This is part informational, and part not.
>>
>> We have a donated server from SevenL networks that has sat mostly
>> unused up until now. What we would like to do is more the AUR and
>> community on to that machine, so that TUs can get real (limited) shell
>> accounts and the people managing this side of the project get a bit
>> more control.
>>
>> As far as I know, things are almost ready to go, but what we need to
>> do is setup a good time to "freeze" the AUR and community so we can
>> switch over the DNS and change checkout locations.
>>
>> Once this is complete, we can move forward with switching community to
>> SVN and using the official dbscripts for managing the repo. This way
>> you guys can get your own testing repo too!
>>
>> Sooo... the list, as I see it:
>> * Decide on a date and time for the move
>> * Get SSH keys from all TUs
>> * Switch DNS over
>> * Disable the AUR/community on gerolde
>>
>> Anything I'm missing? Suggestions as to a good date?
>>
>
>
> I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
> AUR/community move is done. So we could do the community readline
> rebuild (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15165) in the new
> community-testing repo then move everything to core/extra/community
> once it's done.

I was thinking of a bit longer timeline for the SVN switchover. In my
head I had: move machines sometime this week, do the svn transition
next week. Is that too long?

>  If we go this way, I suggest doing the move  very soon (this week or
> next week) as we want to complete the readline rebuild so we could
> start the massive libjpeg rebuild. The timing of the AUR/community
> move couldn't be better.

Re: [aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Eric Bélanger]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> Hey all,
> This is part informational, and part not.
>
> We have a donated server from SevenL networks that has sat mostly
> unused up until now. What we would like to do is more the AUR and
> community on to that machine, so that TUs can get real (limited) shell
> accounts and the people managing this side of the project get a bit
> more control.
>
> As far as I know, things are almost ready to go, but what we need to
> do is setup a good time to "freeze" the AUR and community so we can
> switch over the DNS and change checkout locations.
>
> Once this is complete, we can move forward with switching community to
> SVN and using the official dbscripts for managing the repo. This way
> you guys can get your own testing repo too!
>
> Sooo... the list, as I see it:
> * Decide on a date and time for the move
> * Get SSH keys from all TUs
> * Switch DNS over
> * Disable the AUR/community on gerolde
>
> Anything I'm missing? Suggestions as to a good date?
>


I propose keeping the readline rebuild in testing until the
AUR/community move is done. So we could do the community readline
rebuild (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/15165) in the new
community-testing repo then move everything to core/extra/community
once it's done.

 If we go this way, I suggest doing the move  very soon (this week or
next week) as we want to complete the readline rebuild so we could
start the massive libjpeg rebuild. The timing of the AUR/community
move couldn't be better.

[aur-general] Moving the AUR/community

[Aaron Griffin]

Hey all,
This is part informational, and part not.

We have a donated server from SevenL networks that has sat mostly
unused up until now. What we would like to do is more the AUR and
community on to that machine, so that TUs can get real (limited) shell
accounts and the people managing this side of the project get a bit
more control.

As far as I know, things are almost ready to go, but what we need to
do is setup a good time to "freeze" the AUR and community so we can
switch over the DNS and change checkout locations.

Once this is complete, we can move forward with switching community to
SVN and using the official dbscripts for managing the repo. This way
you guys can get your own testing repo too!

Sooo... the list, as I see it:
* Decide on a date and time for the move
* Get SSH keys from all TUs
* Switch DNS over
* Disable the AUR/community on gerolde

Anything I'm missing? Suggestions as to a good date?

Re: [aur-general] Request for disowning the eeepc-linux package

[Andreas Baumann]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 08:22:04PM +0300, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
> Andreas Baumann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> Could disown disown the package 'eeepc-linux'
>> (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14774)?
>>
>> No reaction from the current maintainer.
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Andreas Baumann
>>
>> --
>> Andreas Baumann
>> Trottenstrasse 20
>> CH-8037 Zuerich
>> Telefon: +41(0)76/373 01 29
>> E-mail: abaum...@yahoo.com
>> Homepage: www.andreasbaumann.cc
>>   
>
> Done. Cheers. :)

Updating the package very fast now. ;-)

Thanks,

Andreas

-- 
Andreas Baumann
Trottenstrasse 20
CH-8037 Zuerich
Telefon: +41(0)76/373 01 29
E-mail: abaum...@yahoo.com
Homepage: www.andreasbaumann.cc

Re: [aur-general] Request for disowning the eeepc-linux package

[Evangelos Foutras]

Andreas Baumann wrote:

Hi,


Could disown disown the package 'eeepc-linux'
(http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14774)?

No reaction from the current maintainer.

Greetings

Andreas Baumann

--
Andreas Baumann
Trottenstrasse 20
CH-8037 Zuerich
Telefon: +41(0)76/373 01 29
E-mail: abaum...@yahoo.com
Homepage: www.andreasbaumann.cc
  


Done. Cheers. :)

[aur-general] Request for disowning the eeepc-linux package

[Andreas Baumann]

Hi,


Could disown disown the package 'eeepc-linux'
(http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14774)?

No reaction from the current maintainer.

Greetings

Andreas Baumann

--
Andreas Baumann
Trottenstrasse 20
CH-8037 Zuerich
Telefon: +41(0)76/373 01 29
E-mail: abaum...@yahoo.com
Homepage: www.andreasbaumann.cc

Re: [aur-general] [arch-dev-public] Status of arch=any ?

[Aaron Griffin]

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:03 AM, Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> 2009/5/14 Aaron Griffin :
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Abhishek Dasgupta  wrote:
>>> 2009/5/14 Abhishek Dasgupta :
 2009/5/14 Aaron Griffin :
> One quick thing to note - because pacman reads .PKGINFO files to get
> metadata, it's nice to have them at the beginning of the tar. tar
> --append is going to slap them on the end. This could make a
> significant difference on larger packages
>

 The previous commit was actually placing .PKGINFO at the end. The
 attached patch fixes that and also uses fakeroot otherwise the tarball
 would get the permissions of the user running convert-to-any.

>>>
>>> forgot to attach last time.
>>
>
> Bump. Probably this can be tried out for the kde-unstable branch
> to iron out any bugs that are remaining?

Which part? Is there a patch I forgot to merge, or are you just
bumping the dbscripts as a whole?

Re: [aur-general] Request: Removal of "java-gstreamer"

[Xyne]

> > Why not just rename it java-gstreamer-java? That way we can respect
> > the archlinux policies, and also keep the origal name for anyone
> > trying to find it on the aur.
> 
> I chuckled. I assume this isn't a serious suggestion. Though it would
> solve it, it's not really a "solution".

As I was reading the replies to this thread I actually thought of
"java-gstreamer-java" too before I saw Laurie's suggestion. It does
sound a bit silly but it makes sense at the same time if gstreamer-java
can only be meaningfully used by Java. With the current packaging
guidelines, the "-" prefix makes it instantly clear that the
packages is a libarary/modules/etc of that language and not a
stand-alone/front-end application. This is very useful in the absence
of clear categories or tags when a user is browsing the list of
available packages.

Perhaps we can all agree that the best solution is to use the name
"gstreamer-java", which is quite clear as Aaron pointed out, but put
"java-gstreamer" and "java-gstreamer-java" in the provides array for
the sake of uniformity.

To be honest, I'm not really bothered either way and I only asked about
the name originally because I was unaware that the upstream name was
"gstreamer-java".

Xyne

Re: [aur-general] [arch-dev-public] Status of arch=any ?

[Abhishek Dasgupta]

2009/5/14 Aaron Griffin :
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Abhishek Dasgupta  wrote:
>> 2009/5/14 Abhishek Dasgupta :
>>> 2009/5/14 Aaron Griffin :
 One quick thing to note - because pacman reads .PKGINFO files to get
 metadata, it's nice to have them at the beginning of the tar. tar
 --append is going to slap them on the end. This could make a
 significant difference on larger packages

>>>
>>> The previous commit was actually placing .PKGINFO at the end. The
>>> attached patch fixes that and also uses fakeroot otherwise the tarball
>>> would get the permissions of the user running convert-to-any.
>>>
>>
>> forgot to attach last time.
>

Bump. Probably this can be tried out for the kde-unstable branch
to iron out any bugs that are remaining?

-- 
Abhishek