That's great korrode. Thanks. :)
Is everyone agreed vis-a-vis the new name scheme? I only ask because a TU
seemed to have other ideas regarding Compiz package naming consistency - I
for instance was asked to rename compiz-bzr to compiz-core-bzr.
On 26 July 2014 16:39, Rob McCathie korr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Rob McCathie korr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Charles Bos charlesb...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi /dev/rs0,
Chazza here. If you don't want to continue maintaining compiz-core-devel
I'd be fine with taking over.
Regards
On 25 July 2014 17:17, /dev/rs0 r...@secretco.de.com wrote:
Hello Everyone,
I think it definitely makes sense to drop the 'core' name and take on
the
'legacy' scheme as described.
Additionally, seeing as 'compiz-core-bzr' is more actively maintained,
and
that 'compiz-core-devel' is basically a derivative now; I've been
curious
if Chazza would like to adopt the package.
I occasionally receive patches from him and notice much more community
involvement on the Wiki/AUR/Forums in regard to 'compiz-core-bzr'. I
seem
to be an unnecessary middleman for such an infrequently updated
package.
/dev/rs0
On 07/25/2014 03:43 AM, Rob McCathie wrote:
Hello AUR general Compiz package maintainers.
There was some discussion about Compiz packages a little while ago, i
don't think that much came of it. I'd like to re-open the discussion.
My opinions/suggestions:
Calling the 0.8 series compiz and the 0.9 series compiz-devel is
no longer correct, it hasn't been for quite some time.
All information on this page:
http://www.compiz.org/
is completely wrong and out of date, like 5 years out of date, and
should not be used as a reference for anything.
Tracking of the state of Compiz should be done from here:
https://launchpad.net/compiz
Development of the 0.8 series is as close to being dead as it could
be. Unless you count 2 tiny commits 5 months ago, nothing has been
done in 16 months, and even that 16 month old commit was a minor
change just to get it working with KDE 4.10, with the commit prior to
that being an additional 5 months back.
http://cgit.compiz.org/compiz/core/log/?h=compiz-0.8
My suggestion is pretty simple, compiz becomes the 0.9 series, the
0.8 series becomes compiz-legacy.
Any 0.9 series packages that have core in their name should have it
removed, since the concept of Compiz being split up has been dropped
since the 0.9 series. The 0.9 series doesn't have a core component,
it's just compiz.
Some examples:
martadinata666's compiz-core package would become
compiz-legacy-core
dev_rs0's compiz-core-devel package would become simply compiz
Chazza's compiz-core-bzr package would become compiz-bzr
flexiondotorg's compiz-core-mate package would become
compiz-legacy-core-mate
My compiz-gtk-standalone package would become
compiz-legacy-gtk-standalone
All the compiz-fusion-plugins-* packages would become
compiz-legacy-fusion-plugins-*
...and so on.
What are everyone's thoughts?
--
Regards,
Rob McCathie
Charles, i started setting up my new package for Manjaro and since it
included converting the package back to using release archives and
doing 90% of the work to make a suitable generic 'compiz' package for
AUR, i figured i'd post it to you, maybe save you a few mins:
http://www.paradoxcomputers.com.au/arch/packages/compiz-0.9.11.2-1.src.tar.gz
I retained your style and patchset, the only thing i did change was
setting cpp as a default plugin at compile time, rather than modifying
the .desktop file... because who isn't going to use ccp? ;)
Plus minimal users who start compiz from their xinitrc get no use from
the .desktop file.
The package is named simply compiz. If we're going to go with the
naming convention as discussed, Charles can simply upload this package
(or whatever), /dev/sr0 you could just flag your package for deletion.
--
Regards,
Rob McCathie
Sorry not deletion, get it merged after Chazza uploads.
