Re: [aur-general] packages with lots of docs?
Allan McRae wrote: > On 09/03/10 08:40, Andrea Scarpino wrote: *SNIP* > > IMHO you should split it. > > Agreed. namcap from [testing] should give you a warning about too many > docs if you left it in one package. Great! I just wanted to make sure that I'm on the right track. Thanks for the replies. > > Also, what prefix docs packages should have? Because I see more -docs and a > lot > > of -doc (mainly texlive packages) in our repo. > > docs? Not that it matters... I have -docs in my PKGBUILD now, and I'll stick with that. -- Chris
Re: [aur-general] packages with lots of docs?
On 09/03/10 11:07, Loui Chang wrote: On Tue 09 Mar 2010 10:25 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: On 09/03/10 08:40, Andrea Scarpino wrote: On Monday 08 March 2010 23:29:09 Chris Brannon wrote: Hi, I'm maintaining ipython in [community]. Right now, the PKGBUILD just removes all the docs. I can see the reasoning. The compressed package size grows nearly five-fold when they are included. I have several options. I can keep on stripping docs, I can include the docs in the ipython package, or I can generate a split package. I wrote a PKGBUILD that produces the split packages ipython and ipython-doc. I noticed that koffice from [extra] has its docs split. But nobody seems to be doing that for anything in [community]. So should I go ahead and commit my split PKGBUILD? -- Chris IMHO you should split it. Agreed. namcap from [testing] should give you a warning about too many docs if you left it in one package. Also, what prefix docs packages should have? Because I see more -docs and a lot of -doc (mainly texlive packages) in our repo. docs? Not that it matters... doc would be short for documentation docs would be short for docsumentation? documents?
Re: [aur-general] packages with lots of docs?
Loui Chang wrote: > On Tue 09 Mar 2010 10:25 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: *SNIP* > > docs? Not that it matters... > > doc would be short for documentation > docs would be short for docsumentation? In speech or email, people regularly use phrases like "read the docs". I have no idea why. It's just colloquial, I guess. A friend of mine abbreviates documentation as docu. -- Chris
Re: [aur-general] packages with lots of docs?
On Tue 09 Mar 2010 10:25 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 09/03/10 08:40, Andrea Scarpino wrote: > >On Monday 08 March 2010 23:29:09 Chris Brannon wrote: > >>Hi, > >>I'm maintaining ipython in [community]. Right now, the PKGBUILD just > >>removes all the docs. I can see the reasoning. > >>The compressed package size grows nearly five-fold when they are included. > >>I have several options. I can keep on stripping docs, I can include the > >>docs in the ipython package, or I can generate a split package. > >>I wrote a PKGBUILD that produces the split packages ipython and > >>ipython-doc. I noticed that koffice from [extra] has its docs split. But > >>nobody seems to be doing that for anything in [community]. > >>So should I go ahead and commit my split PKGBUILD? > >> > >>-- Chris > >IMHO you should split it. > > Agreed. namcap from [testing] should give you a warning about too > many docs if you left it in one package. > > >Also, what prefix docs packages should have? Because I see more -docs and a > >lot > >of -doc (mainly texlive packages) in our repo. > > docs? Not that it matters... doc would be short for documentation docs would be short for docsumentation?
Re: [aur-general] packages with lots of docs?
On 09/03/10 08:40, Andrea Scarpino wrote: On Monday 08 March 2010 23:29:09 Chris Brannon wrote: Hi, I'm maintaining ipython in [community]. Right now, the PKGBUILD just removes all the docs. I can see the reasoning. The compressed package size grows nearly five-fold when they are included. I have several options. I can keep on stripping docs, I can include the docs in the ipython package, or I can generate a split package. I wrote a PKGBUILD that produces the split packages ipython and ipython-doc. I noticed that koffice from [extra] has its docs split. But nobody seems to be doing that for anything in [community]. So should I go ahead and commit my split PKGBUILD? -- Chris IMHO you should split it. Agreed. namcap from [testing] should give you a warning about too many docs if you left it in one package. Also, what prefix docs packages should have? Because I see more -docs and a lot of -doc (mainly texlive packages) in our repo. docs? Not that it matters...
Re: [aur-general] Orphan Request
On 03/08/2010 06:44 PM, arcpp@gmail.com wrote: It is one week already. i just orphaned them. good luck -- Ionut
Re: [aur-general] I would adopt uae...
On 03/09/2010 12:31 AM, Martti Kühne wrote: hello list Uae hasn't been updated for qute a while, and though I can't say how long it was flagged out of date now, I guess it's been a while as well. I'll do it for the time being, have a look at the pkgbuild and see if anything needs some pkg::polish. =) mar77i done. you can adopt it and take care of it :) -- Ionut
Re: [aur-general] packages with lots of docs?
On Monday 08 March 2010 23:29:09 Chris Brannon wrote: > Hi, > I'm maintaining ipython in [community]. Right now, the PKGBUILD just > removes all the docs. I can see the reasoning. > The compressed package size grows nearly five-fold when they are included. > I have several options. I can keep on stripping docs, I can include the > docs in the ipython package, or I can generate a split package. > I wrote a PKGBUILD that produces the split packages ipython and > ipython-doc. I noticed that koffice from [extra] has its docs split. But > nobody seems to be doing that for anything in [community]. > So should I go ahead and commit my split PKGBUILD? > > -- Chris IMHO you should split it. Also, what prefix docs packages should have? Because I see more -docs and a lot of -doc (mainly texlive packages) in our repo. -- Andrea
Re: [aur-general] TU resignation
Bardo wrote: > It's with great sadness that I feel the need to leave my position as a > Trusted User in Arch. In the last few months I haven't been able to > keep up with my duties, and I feel that resigning is the best thing I > can do at the moment I'm sorry to see you go, and I wish you the best of luck, wherever life takes you. > I marked as OOD the ones which need to be updated, adopt the > ones you like. I hope this is helpful. *SNIP* > * flac123 > * gnormalize: how to kill the unix do-one-thing-n-do-it-well paradigm > in one shot. Optdepends hell #2 I adopted these two. I can also adopt acerhk if needed. I don't use it, but I did one of the recent updates. -- Chris
[aur-general] packages with lots of docs?
Hi, I'm maintaining ipython in [community]. Right now, the PKGBUILD just removes all the docs. I can see the reasoning. The compressed package size grows nearly five-fold when they are included. I have several options. I can keep on stripping docs, I can include the docs in the ipython package, or I can generate a split package. I wrote a PKGBUILD that produces the split packages ipython and ipython-doc. I noticed that koffice from [extra] has its docs split. But nobody seems to be doing that for anything in [community]. So should I go ahead and commit my split PKGBUILD? -- Chris
[aur-general] I would adopt uae...
hello list Uae hasn't been updated for qute a while, and though I can't say how long it was flagged out of date now, I guess it's been a while as well. I'll do it for the time being, have a look at the pkgbuild and see if anything needs some pkg::polish. =) mar77i
Re: [aur-general] TU resignation
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 01:36:37AM +0100, bardo wrote: > It's with great sadness that I feel the need to leave my position as a > Trusted User in Arch. In the last few months I haven't been able to > keep up with my duties, and I feel that resigning is the best thing I > can do at the moment, since real life is taking much more time than > there is in a day and I can't keep up with the high standards that > Arch deserves. I'd like to thank each and everyone at the Arch team, > this has been a fun ride and I learned a lot in these years. Hopefully > I'll be back contributing someday, maybe not in the same way, but > whatever. Surely I'll stick around, however, as much as my free time > allows me. Wish you best of luck and look forward to see you back after you learn a little bit better to manage your time! Someone already uncovered the truth before. Regards, Jaroslav -- night storm I rely on my little plague god pgp0b21DAes2I.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] Orphan Request
It is one week already. On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:13 AM, Ray Rashif wrote: > On 03/03/2010, Hilton Medeiros wrote: >> I disagree. I believe the developer should have priority and be given >> the ownership as soon as possible. You don't have to wait the >> maintainer kiss good bye e hug the build. It is just a build script. > > I concur, but it's rude for us to just barge in like that. It's a > simple matter between the developer and the buildscript maintainer, so > it's best left up to them to contact each other, and then if the > maintainer tries anything funny (or does not try anything at all) we > disown it. > > A 7-day or next-weekend grace period is good for things like this (for > the maintainer to respond to the orphan request). I had once orphaned > a package for a developer who didn't even claim it (synfig*), but it > took me a while before I read and replied to the e-mail outlining a > build-related matter. > > > -- > GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD >
Re: [aur-general] TU resignation
On Monday 08 March 2010 01:36:37 bardo wrote: > It's with great sadness that I feel the need to leave my position as a > Trusted User in Arch. In the last few months I haven't been able to > keep up with my duties, and I feel that resigning is the best thing I > can do at the moment, since real life is taking much more time than > there is in a day and I can't keep up with the high standards that > Arch deserves. I'd like to thank each and everyone at the Arch team, > this has been a fun ride and I learned a lot in these years. Hopefully > I'll be back contributing someday, maybe not in the same way, but > whatever. Surely I'll stick around, however, as much as my free time > allows me. > > At the moment I own a few dozens of packages in [community], and since > I'd like to make the transition as smooth as possible, a little report > follows, I marked as OOD the ones which need to be updated, adopt the > ones you like. I hope this is helpful. > > Take care, > Corrado I am really sad to hear that :( You are a good developer and packager. Good luck for everything and see you to next Arch Linux Italia meeting. Best best regards -- Andrea
Re: [aur-general] TU resignation
On 03/08/2010 02:36 AM, bardo wrote: It's with great sadness that I feel the need to leave my position as a Trusted User in Arch. In the last few months I haven't been able to keep up with my duties, and I feel that resigning is the best thing I can do at the moment, since real life is taking much more time than there is in a day and I can't keep up with the high standards that Arch deserves. I'd like to thank each and everyone at the Arch team, this has been a fun ride and I learned a lot in these years. Hopefully I'll be back contributing someday, maybe not in the same way, but whatever. Surely I'll stick around, however, as much as my free time allows me. At the moment I own a few dozens of packages in [community], and since I'd like to make the transition as smooth as possible, a little report follows, I marked as OOD the ones which need to be updated, adopt the ones you like. I hope this is helpful. Take care, Corrado good luck and take care. is sad to see how the old crew is vanishing. * rss-glx: 3d screen-savers, usually gives a few problems with .desktop files. See http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18300 i'll take this since i'm using it and i want to improve it. also any other packages that are depends to my packages, one that i think is libasyncns -- Ionut
