Re: [aur-general] remove: tqsl

[Maxime Gauduin]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Wijnand Modderman-Lenstra 
 wrote:

Hi,

Can you please remove the tsql package from AUR? I adopted the 
orphaned

trustedqsl package, tqsl is a duplicate of that.

~Wijnand

Deleted (no votes nor comments), thx. What about tqsllib? BTW, please 
include links to the packages next time.

--
Maxime

Re: [aur-general] Deletion request: ttf-cantarell

[Maxime Gauduin]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 2:27 AM, Jason St. John  
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Jerome Leclanche  
wrote:
 On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Jason St. John 
 wrote:

 Hello,

 I'm requesting that ttf-cantarell be deleted. It appears to be an 
old

 duplicate of cantarell-fonts, which is in [extra].

 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-cantarell/
 https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/any/cantarell-fonts/

 Thanks

 Isnt the package in extra badly named? Sounds to me like it should 
be

 ttf-cantarell or fonts-cantarell.
 J. Leclanche




Yeah, I think the package in [extra] should be named ttf-cantarell,
but this is likely the wrong mailing list for petitioning for that to
change...

Jason

P.S. Remember to bottom-post on the Arch mailing lists.


Deleted, thx.
--
Maxime

Re: [aur-general] Disown request: links-g-directfb

[Maxime Gauduin]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 8:35 AM, lukas.gra...@web.de wrote:


My last try to write this mail ;)
 
Hi,
I would like to take links-g-directfb over. The owner jokerboy did 
not answer within to weeks.

link: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/links-g-directfb/
Would you be so nice to disown that package.

Note that other poeple are interrested to maintain the other packages 
by jokerboy listed obove, especialy "kfaenza-icon-theme" with link 
"https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/kfaenza-icon-theme";.


Thanx lks

There was no need to create a duplicate thread for this. You sent your 
mail to JokerBoy on the 5th, there is still one day left before we can 
disown the package.

--
Maxime

Re: [aur-general] Request to merge eclipse-382 and eclipse-38

[Maxime Gauduin]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen 
 wrote:

Den 17-10-2013 06:00, Fernando Gilberto da Silva skrev:

No response from the maintainer.

How did you try to contact them? How long have you been waiting for a 
response? Note the 3rd point at

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR#Other_requests


Could someone merge

eclipse-382 [...] into eclipse-38 [...] ?

You realise that by merging -382 into -38 (which I agree should 
happen), the PKGBUILD from -38 is the one that's going to take 
precedence, right? You'll need to reupload your package (named as 
-38) for the -38 package to actually be updated. Of course, you need 
to be the maintainer of the package, which you've already requested. 
:)



What's more, I am ready to take responsibility for maintaining this
package. Could someone do me a favour, disown the package for me?


See the first part of the response.

--
Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen 

Please upload a eclipse3.8 package, so it follows the naming scheme 
found in our repos for different versions of an existing package. Then 
I'll merge eclipse-38 and and eclipse-382 into it. 
BTW, eclipse-38 is already an orphan.


Cheers,
--
Maxime

Re: [aur-general] [rmlint] Package merge

[Maxime Gauduin]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Doug Newgard  
wrote:



 From: flor...@floriandejonckheere.be
 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:12:36 +0200
 To: aur-general@archlinux.org
 Subject: Re: [aur-general] [rmlint] Package merge

 


 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:58:25 +0200
 From: flor...@floriandejonckheere.be
 To: aur-general@archlinux.org
 Subject: Re: [aur-general] [rmlint] Package merge

 On Oct 16, 2013 5:44 PM, "Doug Newgard"  
wrote:


 

 From: flor...@floriandejonckheere.be
 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 16:12:42 +0200
 To: aur-general@archlinux.org
 Subject: [aur-general] [rmlint] Package merge

 Please merge rmlint [1] into rmlint-git [2]. GitHub dropped 
named



 downloads

 a while ago, and thus the package is outdated.

 Thanks

 [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/rmlint/
 [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/rmlint-git/

 It's out of date, but I don't know about outdated. You can still 
get



 release tarballs from Github.

 But the release tarballs reflect the current state of master, if 
I'm not

 mistaken.

 Nope, they reflect tags. You can get a tarball of master as well, 
but

 that's not what I'm talking about.



 As far as I can tell from the repo, the only existing tag is 
'1.0.6b',

 which makes the AUR package more recent. Am I missing something?

Just that the author is really bad at versioning. 1.0.8 in the AUR is 
from Apr 2011, the 1.0.6b tag is from Nov 2012, and 1.0.0 in the 
debian dir is from Mar 2013. 

Then rmlint should package the 1.0.6b version found on GitHub if it is 
indeed the most recent. No need to merge into the git counterpart.

--
Maxime

Re: [aur-general] Deletion Request - rEFIt

[Maxime Gauduin]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Justin Dray  wrote:
Slim had a decent sized update about 2 weeks ago, it started 
supporting the
normal xsession methods rather than a specific list and a variety of 
other
things, the version before that was less than a week old. It's 
stable, but

certainly not dead.

Regards,
Justin Dray
E: jus...@dray.be
M: 0433348284


On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Sam Stuewe 
wrote:



 On 2013-10-15 13:56, Keshav Padram Amburay wrote:


 Hi,
  rEFIt is no longer maintained upstream and its author 
recommends
 everyone to switch to rEFInd instead, at 
http://refit.sourceforge.net/ .

 So
 please delete AUR refit 
https://aur.archlinux.org/**packages/refit/package.


 With Best Regards,

 Keshav


 I am not a TU, so this is not an official set of logic, but if the 
sources
 still exist (even if it has been deprecated or is no longer 
maintained), I
 see no reason for the package to be removed unless there is a 
specific and
 blatant security flaw. For example, SLiM is still in the official 
repos

 despite maintenance largely being dead and many other packages being
 considered preferable.

 If people would like to continue using rEFIt, despite rEFInd's
 superiority, I don't see the inherent issue.

 All the best,

 -Sam


Well, in this case rEFInd is a fork of rEFIt which provides the same 
features and probably more, and is actively developped. I don't see why 
people would prefer rEFIt over rEFInd, but that is just my opinion. I 
would personally remove refit, but I guess it doesn't harm the AUR for 
now.

What do other TUs think?

Cheers,
--
Maxime

Re: [aur-general] remove: tqsl

[Wijnand Modderman-Lenstra]

Hi,

Maxime Gauduin  wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Wijnand Modderman-Lenstra
>  wrote:
> >Can you please remove the tsql package from AUR?
>
> Deleted (no votes nor comments), thx.

Thanks Maxime!

> What about tqsllib?

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/tqsllib/

Wasn't sure what to do with that, but I fixed the PKGBUILD so that it compiles
again, no more recent version available at SF.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/trustedqsl/files/tqsllib/

~wijnand


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]

[Arch Website Notification]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 2 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 10 packages missing signoffs
* 6 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)


== New packages in [community-testing] in last 24 hours (2 total) ==

* cgminer-3.6.3-1 (i686)
* cgminer-3.6.3-1 (x86_64)


== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (8 total) ==

* cgminer-3.6.3-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* gdal-1.10.0-3 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* python-pytables-3.0.0-4 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* vtk-5.10.1-10 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* cgminer-3.6.3-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* gdal-1.10.0-3 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* python-pytables-3.0.0-4 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* vtk-5.10.1-10 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs

== Incomplete signoffs for [unknown] (2 total) ==

* xmind-3.3.1-2 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* xmind-3.3.1-2 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs


== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (6 total) ==

* python-pytables-3.0.0-4 (i686), since 2013-09-14
* gdal-1.10.0-3 (i686), since 2013-09-14
* vtk-5.10.1-10 (i686), since 2013-09-14
* python-pytables-3.0.0-4 (x86_64), since 2013-09-14
* gdal-1.10.0-3 (x86_64), since 2013-09-14
* vtk-5.10.1-10 (x86_64), since 2013-09-14


== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1. allan - 4 signoffs

Re: [aur-general] remove: tqsl

[Maxime Gauduin]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Wijnand Modderman-Lenstra 
 wrote:

Hi,

Maxime Gauduin  wrote:

 On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Wijnand Modderman-Lenstra
  wrote:
 >Can you please remove the tsql package from AUR?

 Deleted (no votes nor comments), thx.


Thanks Maxime!


 What about tqsllib?


https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/tqsllib/

Wasn't sure what to do with that, but I fixed the PKGBUILD so that it 
compiles

again, no more recent version available at SF.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/trustedqsl/files/tqsllib/

~wijnand


Nice, thx for fixing that one as well.

Cheers,
--
Maxime

[aur-general] Deletion request ffmpeg-full-git-fixed

[Justin Dray]

Trying to navigate the pile of different versions of ffmpeg on AUR is quite
a hassle currently.

Please either delete ffmpeg-full-git-fixed or merge it in to
ffmpeg-full-git. It appears to have only been made due to the original
maintainer of ffmpeg-full-git not responding quickly, and the maintainer of
ffmpeg-full-git-fixed has stated in the comments that he no longer
maintains it. It has also been marked as out of date for 2+ months.

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ffmpeg-full-git-fixed/

Regards,
Justin Dray
E: jus...@dray.be
M: 0433348284

[aur-general] Removal Request

[Dustin Falgout]

Hi,

I noticed that thunderbird-extension-gnome-keyring-git^[1] 
 
is a duplicate of thunderbird-gnome-keyring-git^[2] 
 . It has 
already been disowned so could someone remove it?


Thanks!!
Dustin

---
[1] 
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/thunderbird-extension-gnome-keyring-git/

[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/thunderbird-gnome-keyring/

Re: [aur-general] Deletion request ffmpeg-full-git-fixed

[Felix Yan]

On Friday, October 18, 2013 22:59:36 Justin Dray wrote:
> Trying to navigate the pile of different versions of ffmpeg on AUR is quite
> a hassle currently.
> 
> Please either delete ffmpeg-full-git-fixed or merge it in to
> ffmpeg-full-git. It appears to have only been made due to the original
> maintainer of ffmpeg-full-git not responding quickly, and the maintainer of
> ffmpeg-full-git-fixed has stated in the comments that he no longer
> maintains it. It has also been marked as out of date for 2+ months.
> 
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ffmpeg-full-git-fixed/
> 
> Regards,
> Justin Dray
> E: jus...@dray.be
> M: 0433348284

Removed, thanks.

Regards,
Felix Yan

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [aur-general] Removal Request

[Felix Yan]

On Friday, October 18, 2013 08:25:48 Dustin Falgout wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I noticed that thunderbird-extension-gnome-keyring-git^[1] 
>  
> is a duplicate of thunderbird-gnome-keyring-git^[2] 
>  . It has 
> already been disowned so could someone remove it?
> 
> Thanks!!
> Dustin
> 
> ---
> [1] 
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/thunderbird-extension-gnome-keyring-git/
> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/thunderbird-gnome-keyring/

Removed, thanks.

Regards,
Felix Yan

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [aur-general] Package merge request: vim-solarized-git and vim-colors-solarized-git

[Jason St. John]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Felix Yan  wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 20:28:36 Jason St. John wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Jason St. John  wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Jason St. John  wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure which is a better package name as there seems to be no
>> >> dominating convention in the AUR, so I will leave that decision up to
>> >> the TUs.
>> >>
>> >> Please do one of the following:
>> >> --- merge vim-solarized-git into vim-colors-solarized-git
>> >> --- have the package maintainer update vim-solarized-git and delete
>> >> vim-colors-solarized-git
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I've CC'd the maintainer of both packages.
>> >>
>> >> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vim-solarized-git/
>> >> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vim-colors-solarized-git/
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >
>> > This still needs to be acted upon.
>>
>> Can a TU delete vim-solarized-git please?
>>
>> Jason
>
> We still need to wait for xales's response, as this is his package and will 
> still be maintained by him even after the merge.
>
> Regards,
> Felix Yan

xales is the new maintainer of both packages, and instead of updating
vim-solarized-git, he created a new package
(vim-colors-solarized-git). I think it's pretty clear which package
xales prefers.

Jason

[aur-general] deletion request

[G. Schlisio]

please delete the currently orphan vim-r-plugin2 [0] which is an 
outdated duplicate of vim-r [1].

thanks

[0] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vim-r-plugin2/
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vim-r/

Re: [aur-general] deletion request

[Xyne]

On 2013-10-18 17:35 +0200
G. Schlisio wrote:

>please delete the currently orphan vim-r-plugin2 [0] which is an 
>outdated duplicate of vim-r [1].
>thanks
>
>[0] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vim-r-plugin2/
>[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vim-r/

done, thanks