Re: [aur-general] Aurphan in community
On Sat 30 Apr 2011 09:39 +0300, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: > Loui Chang wrote: > > On Fri 29 Apr 2011 21:49 -0400, keenerd wrote: > >> I would like to move Aurphan into community. I've added a number of > >> features to it lately, and it has become an automated means of > >> answering "what can I do to help Arch", parsing and summarizing the > >> todo list, the bugtracker and the orphans. The one random dev I've > >> asked seems cool with it, however he thought a wider consensus should > >> be found. It has enough votes but > >> > >> Aurphan could be considered an AUR helper. By default it searches the > >> AUR for AUR packages you already have installed. It does not download > >> anything. > >> > >> I will change it so the default behavior does not search the AUR. > >> (New default would display the --help) I won't change the name, on > >> account of it being cute. > > > >> aur page: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43726 > >> project page: http://kmkeen.com/aurphan/ > > > > This script seems like a really nice idea, but if it deals with > > unsupported packages it should remain in that domain. Maybe move the > > functionality that deals with unsupported into an add-on that you can > > install separately? > > Didn't the extremely popular powerpill also have support for the AUR? > Although i had never used it, i seem to recall it did, and it was in > community. Powerpill was always a pacman wrapper that had no interface to the AUR. You could however install an add-on called bauerbill which would give you functionality with the AUR. Though aurbuild did briefly make its appearance into [community] many years ago, it was quickly removed for obvious reasons. The only official client for the AUR that remained for any time was called aurtools and it was part of the system that TUs used for submitting binary packages to [community] only. > Also from your reply on [0] and particularly the "Functionality needs to > be moved to the clients for the better future of the AUR." part, i got > the impression that the TU's might actually be considering creating or > baptising an AUR client official pretty soon. I did kind of think that it might be a good idea to have a minimal official client, but that's no longer the case. Arch has no official client for you to utilize its web service, nor its email service. I'll maintain there should be no official client for the AUR either. Maybe a minimal reference client could be useful for testing purposes though. > The AUR isn't usable 100% from the web interface like it was before > and users are pratically forced to use one of the many The web interface seems to work perfectly fine for me.
Re: [aur-general] Aurphan in community
On Sat 30 Apr 2011 16:12 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > On 30/04/11 12:25, Loui Chang wrote: > >On Fri 29 Apr 2011 21:49 -0400, keenerd wrote: > >>I would like to move Aurphan into community. I've added a number of > >>features to it lately, and it has become an automated means of > >>answering "what can I do to help Arch", parsing and summarizing the > >>todo list, the bugtracker and the orphans. The one random dev I've > >>asked seems cool with it, however he thought a wider consensus should > >>be found. It has enough votes but > >> > >>Aurphan could be considered an AUR helper. By default it searches the > >>AUR for AUR packages you already have installed. It does not download > >>anything. > >> > >>I will change it so the default behavior does not search the AUR. > >>(New default would display the --help) I won't change the name, on > >>account of it being cute. > > > >>aur page: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43726 > >>project page: http://kmkeen.com/aurphan/ > > > >This script seems like a really nice idea, but if it deals with > >unsupported packages it should remain in that domain. Maybe move the > >functionality that deals with unsupported into an add-on that you can > >install separately? > > We should also drop wget, curl and firefox from the repos as they can be > used to download unsupported packages... In fact, this script is safer > because it does not even do that. Allan, I appreciate your work but you completely missed the point. wget, curl and firefox do not contain functionality to specifically access the unsupported packages. They are general network programs. I guess it depends on what your vision is. If you want more people expecting support for unsupported packages, then put these scripts into extra or community. I can't stop you, I'm just a lowly nobody and you're a big bad dev.
Re: [aur-general] Aurphan in community
On 30/04/11 17:36, Loui Chang wrote: On Sat 30 Apr 2011 16:12 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: On 30/04/11 12:25, Loui Chang wrote: On Fri 29 Apr 2011 21:49 -0400, keenerd wrote: I would like to move Aurphan into community. I've added a number of features to it lately, and it has become an automated means of answering "what can I do to help Arch", parsing and summarizing the todo list, the bugtracker and the orphans. The one random dev I've asked seems cool with it, however he thought a wider consensus should be found. It has enough votes but Aurphan could be considered an AUR helper. By default it searches the AUR for AUR packages you already have installed. It does not download anything. I will change it so the default behavior does not search the AUR. (New default would display the --help) I won't change the name, on account of it being cute. aur page: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43726 project page: http://kmkeen.com/aurphan/ This script seems like a really nice idea, but if it deals with unsupported packages it should remain in that domain. Maybe move the functionality that deals with unsupported into an add-on that you can install separately? We should also drop wget, curl and firefox from the repos as they can be used to download unsupported packages... In fact, this script is safer because it does not even do that. Allan, I appreciate your work but you completely missed the point. wget, curl and firefox do not contain functionality to specifically access the unsupported packages. They are general network programs. I guess it depends on what your vision is. If you want more people expecting support for unsupported packages, then put these scripts into extra or community. I can't stop you, I'm just a lowly nobody and you're a big bad dev. My point was that (as far as I can tell) this software does nothing with AUR packages other than collates a bit of information. It does not allow downloading or building packages. I find it difficult to see how this could be seen as supporting AUR packages. Allan
Re: [aur-general] Aurphan in community
Am 30.04.2011 10:10, schrieb Allan McRae: On 30/04/11 17:36, Loui Chang wrote: On Sat 30 Apr 2011 16:12 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: On 30/04/11 12:25, Loui Chang wrote: On Fri 29 Apr 2011 21:49 -0400, keenerd wrote: I would like to move Aurphan into community. I've added a number of features to it lately, and it has become an automated means of answering "what can I do to help Arch", parsing and summarizing the todo list, the bugtracker and the orphans. The one random dev I've asked seems cool with it, however he thought a wider consensus should be found. It has enough votes but Aurphan could be considered an AUR helper. By default it searches the AUR for AUR packages you already have installed. It does not download anything. I will change it so the default behavior does not search the AUR. (New default would display the --help) I won't change the name, on account of it being cute. aur page: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43726 project page: http://kmkeen.com/aurphan/ This script seems like a really nice idea, but if it deals with unsupported packages it should remain in that domain. Maybe move the functionality that deals with unsupported into an add-on that you can install separately? We should also drop wget, curl and firefox from the repos as they can be used to download unsupported packages... In fact, this script is safer because it does not even do that. Allan, I appreciate your work but you completely missed the point. wget, curl and firefox do not contain functionality to specifically access the unsupported packages. They are general network programs. I guess it depends on what your vision is. If you want more people expecting support for unsupported packages, then put these scripts into extra or community. I can't stop you, I'm just a lowly nobody and you're a big bad dev. My point was that (as far as I can tell) this software does nothing with AUR packages other than collates a bit of information. It does not allow downloading or building packages. I find it difficult to see how this could be seen as supporting AUR packages. Allan I think aurphan does not support aur packages but it eases to have better quality of the AUR as such, in recruiting more maintainers and having less orphaned packages there. We should support this. So go for it, Kyle! Regards Stefan
[aur-general] gnome 3 is moving to extra
## GNOME 3.0.1 is being moved in [extra] This is a major update and you should take note of a couple of things: * GNOME3 is replacing GNOME2 * GNOME3 has two modes, "standard" mode (gnome-shell) and "fallback" mode (gnome-panel + metacity) * Some packages, like applets using Bonobo, will be dropped in the next few days. A list will be available at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/GNOME_3/Packages_dropped * pulseaudio is now required to run the GNOME desktop Update and installation instructions are available at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/GNOME_3 Only bugs related to packaging should be reported to http://bugs.archlinux.org/ Crashes and feature requests should be reported to https://bugzilla.gnome.org/ -- Ionuț
[aur-general] [utorrent-server] duplicate?
Hi all, I maintain [1] utorrent-server package and I have noticed a new [2] utorrent-server-userscript package. The software is the same and can be used this way by my package [1] so what is [2] for besides having another script?
[aur-general] Re : [utorrent-server] duplicate?
ooops, links: [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43253 [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48404 De :Pierre-Antoine Vanpe À :aur-general@archlinux.org Envoyé le : Sam 30 avril 2011, 22h 13min 27s Objet : [aur-general] [utorrent-server] duplicate? Hi all, I maintain [1] utorrent-server package and I have noticed a new [2] utorrent-server-userscript package. The software is the same and can be used this way by my package [1] so what is [2] for besides having another script?
