Re: [aur-general] Git over HTTPS
Since he's doing it as part of his job, supposedly, then I really can't see any reason at all that they wouldn't open up port 22 to just to luna for him. Yea, who knows. Like I said earlier, I do feel for the guy.
Re: [aur-general] Git over HTTPS
On 20/06, Johannes Löthberg wrote: I'm rather sure that he never actually said that maintaining the AUR package was part of his job, just avoided the question by saying that he worked on the software. (Though I'm too lazy to check now.) Ah, seems I misread him, quoting cag22hqdefjnt9un6r8ai1iafzsbuqppginszfrj-tfrwjn2...@mail.gmail.com: 2. I currently maintain the ownCloud-beta-client package as part of my involvement with that group. This is done as part of my official duties in my corporate environment. -- Sincerely, Johannes Löthberg PGP Key ID: 0x50FB9B273A9D0BB5 https://theos.kyriasis.com/~kyrias/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] Git over HTTPS
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 09:12:06AM +0300, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote: On 06/16/2015 09:24 AM, Alan Jenkins wrote: I understand why they block port 22 out bound and know it to be a common problem. It is blocked to stop employees accidentally or intentionally leaking important customer or business data. You can also use SSH to bypass security measures in place within the network and even create tunnels back into the network. Seriously I believe that [...] [...] I seriously dont believe that in 2015 security is port based... Oh, you clearly have no clue about the extent of the madness of it all :) /M -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4 email: mag...@therning.org jabber: mag...@therning.org twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. -- Albert Einstein signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] Removal requests
Am 20.06.2015 um 08:11 schrieb Karol Blazewicz: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/kdebase-konsole-xterm/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/konsole2xterm/ Are we OK with such ... packages? On AUR 3 which will be overwritten with AUR 4? Yes. The first one is also on AUR 4 and I added a deletion request at the correct place (via web interface): https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-requests/2015-June/007548.html -- JonnyJD
Re: [aur-general] Git over HTTPS
On 18/06, David Kaylor wrote: 1. Yes, I do have network access outside of my corporate environment. However, much (READ: all) of the project maintenance and code lives on and is performed on my corporate servers. 2. I currently maintain the ownCloud-beta-client package as part of my involvement with that group. This is done as part of my official duties in my corporate environment. My organization is also looking to begin sharing several large projects within a few months. Without another form of access, this would be technically impossible. -- Thomas Swartz I had been wondering if you were working on some packages in a work capacity. Given that, I think it would be a shame to lock out this type of contributor, even though there are probably just a few. Since he's doing it as part of his job, supposedly, then I really can't see any reason at all that they wouldn't open up port 22 to just to luna for him. -- Sincerely, Johannes Löthberg PGP Key ID: 0x50FB9B273A9D0BB5 https://theos.kyriasis.com/~kyrias/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[aur-general] AUR mailing lists - Was: Removal requests
On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 11:02:03 +0200, Marcel Korpel wrote: * Ralf Mardorf (Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:53:52 +0200): IMO in this case the mailing list is the right place for this request There is a separate mailing list for such discussions, which is automatically filled with a request if one uses the 'File Request' link. No reason to clutter aur-general with discussions about package deletion anymore. Johannes mail was received after I sent my mail. I wasn't aware of this list. aur-dev Arch User Repository (AUR) Development aur-general Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR) aur-requestsPublic mailing list for AUR package deletion/merge/orphan requests There still is the question if any of this lists can be used to ask usage questions regarding software provided by the AUR or if e.g. the comments should or shouldn't be used for this purpose. Regards, Ralf -- When googling for arch linux mailing lists the third hit is: Racists on the Arch Linux Mailing List http://lwn.net/Articles/424300/ That's a nice joke, sounds a little bit like an April Fools' joke :D.
Re: [aur-general] Removal requests
On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 08:11:26 +0200, Karol Blazewicz wrote: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/kdebase-konsole-xterm/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/konsole2xterm/ Are we OK with such ... packages? +1 to remove those packages, without doubt at least one of them should be removed and IMO in this case the mailing list is the right place for this request.
Re: [aur-general] Git over HTTPS
On 20/06, David Kaylor wrote: Do you have permission from your employer to user their infrastructure (eg: computers, network) to work on contributions to ArchLinux? If not, they *may* own the IP related to the PKGBUILDs, or any extra scripts you include (in most jurisdictions, if you write a 15 line script, it's copyrighted automatically). I suggest that you carefully study this, and similar scenarios. So, if you have permission, asking for them to open SSH should be trivial. If not, then stop creating tainted contributions at work. If you had bothered to read the entire thread, you should have noticed that the OP has already answered this question. I'm rather sure that he never actually said that maintaining the AUR package was part of his job, just avoided the question by saying that he worked on the software. (Though I'm too lazy to check now.) -- Sincerely, Johannes Löthberg PGP Key ID: 0x50FB9B273A9D0BB5 https://theos.kyriasis.com/~kyrias/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] Removal requests
* Ralf Mardorf info.mard...@rocketmail.com (Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:53:52 +0200): +1 to remove those packages, without doubt at least one of them should be removed and IMO in this case the mailing list is the right place for this request. There is a separate mailing list for such discussions, which is automatically filled with a request if one uses the 'File Request' link. No reason to clutter aur-general with discussions about package deletion anymore.
[aur-general] Need help with some patching for my package (gcc44-multilib)
Hello everybody, I already wrote some days ago a message in this mailing list asking for help, but I noticed that email clients acted in weird ways (GMail on my Nexus and Thunderbird on my laptop acted in different ways for the same mail) so I'm writing you again. I started to upload my packages to AUR4 and I tried to build them up in order to upload working packages... After GCC 5.X, I am not able to build anymore my package 'gcc44-multilib'. I had some problems in compiling (toplevel.c), that I fixed an hand-made patch, but then I have problems in linking (double defines for the function I fixed with my patch)... If someone could give me an hand fixing the package out, it would be really great. AUR link: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gcc44-multilib/ AUR4 link: https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/gcc44-multilib/ The edited PKGBUILD (including the new patch I made): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4152736/gcc44-multilib_future.tar.gz The patch I wrote: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4152736/gcc-fix_toplevel_defines.patch If someone wants to help me, I can upload my source tarball (3rd link) to AUR4 so it can be fixed with Git. Thank you for your attention. -- Giovanni Santini My blog: http://giovannisantini.tk My code: https://github.com/ItachiSan
Re: [aur-general] Git over HTTPS
I'm rather sure that he never actually said that maintaining the AUR package was part of his job, just avoided the question by saying that he worked on the software. (Though I'm too lazy to check now.) I just double checked, and this is what he wrote: 2. I currently maintain the ownCloud-beta-client package as part of my involvement with that group. This is done as part of my official duties in my corporate environment. My organization is also looking to begin sharing several large projects within a few months. Without another form of access, this would be technically impossible. Which sounds to me like he was saying it is part of his job, or at least he has explicit approval to work on it. Why can't he get outbound SSH access to do this, if it is work related? Who knows. But I sort of sympathize with him. Not blaming the AUR4 developer, he has good reasons for the new design, as far as I know. I do wish people would stop focusing on the OP's corporate network policies, stupid as they may be, because it's just not relevant at this point. I, for one, hope he can continue to contribute.
Re: [aur-general] Git over HTTPS
On 06/16/2015 09:24 AM, Alan Jenkins wrote: I understand why they block port 22 out bound and know it to be a common problem. It is blocked to stop employees accidentally or intentionally leaking important customer or business data. You can also use SSH to bypass security measures in place within the network and even create tunnels back into the network. Seriously I believe that [...] [...] I seriously dont believe that in 2015 security is port based...
[aur-general] Removal requests
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/kdebase-konsole-xterm/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/konsole2xterm/ Are we OK with such ... packages?
