Re: [aur-general] [PATCH][tu-bylaws]: raise threshold of sponsors to two
I apologize for contributing to this sturm und drang. On 2019-01-08 12:33, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote: Rules without a process to ensure they actually achieve a useful result don't do the thing they are intended to do. I guess if people are dissatisfied with the application process, then a moratorium might be considered a valid alternative, but I think most will agree it is not a *good* alternative. Historically, reviews happen by a maximum of one person, and it's almost always either me or Levente. And I'm no longer interested in the pressure. Now we're getting recent cases where no one reviews at all, or someone does but only on the last day of the discussion period. Bottom line is that perceptions of inefficiencies in the application process can only be solved by changing the people doing the voting. I agree. I will help share the load and hope the wider TU community will join. The original sponsors should have done this and more in the first place. I don't want to vote for a candidate simply because I cannot find any compelling objections -- I want to vote for a candidate because s/he and sponsor(s) gave me a passionate reason to believe in them. I would like to highlight dvzrv for being very effective - well before my application he was helping improve my PKGBUILDs, during my application he helped me prep, and even after my acceptance he has continued to give great feedback.
Re: [aur-general] Maintainership for gnudatalanguage
Hey Eli, Am Dienstag, 8. Januar 2019, 16:43:34 CET schrieb Eli Schwartz via aur- general: > For general guidance on uploading packages, the authentication process > is discussed at > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository#Sharing_and_mainta > ining_packages Thanks, added an ssh key to my account. :) > If you have any questions about whether a given software is suitable to > be added to the AUR, or questions about writing the PKGBUILD in order to > do so, then you are warmly welcomed to contact this list for advice on a > case-by-case basis. Thanks again, I'll probably take the offer later on. :) -- MfG Jan
Re: [aur-general] Maintainership for gnudatalanguage
He Andrew, Am Dienstag, 8. Januar 2019, 16:43:03 CET schrieb Andrew Crerar: > On 1/8/19 4:27 PM, Jan Kohnert wrote: > > I'd like to contribute and maintain the orphaned package [1]. Reading > > through the docs, I found, I should contact this list for doing so. > > Out of curiosity what documentation did you come across that mentioned > contacting the list before adopting an AUR package? uh, I must confess, I can't remember, it's been quite some weeks, since the package seemed unmaintained, but I read it somewhere and became member of this list for that reason... > Since there is no maintainer for gnudatalanguage at the moment, if you have > an AUR account, you should see a link on the right hand side under Package > Actions named Adopt Package. Click that and you'll become the maintainer of > the package. I found the link and took the package. :) Thanks! -- MfG Jan
Re: [aur-general] TU Application_R: Metal A-wing (a-wing)
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 03:35:28PM +0800, Metal A-wing wrote: > I started using Ubuntu in high school. > And I use Debian at university. > In 2017, I started Archlinux > > I also tried other distributions. linux mint, deepin linux, gentoo, centos This seems fairly rushed. The AUR registration occured in April of 2018, and there is only a handfull of commits to actual AUR packages. Let alone there are not any popular packages what so ever here. The archlinuxcn repository is cool and all, but that doesn't help at all if the AUR contributions are lacking. Thats what the role is for after all. -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] TU application_R: Metal A-wing (a-wing)
Besides what has been outlined by Eli and JereBear, there are some more general remarks I would like to make. I'll start with the first (or "second", since the actual first application was a single sentence) application email. [1] > I think dpkg package manage is too complicated (...) I think that introducing yourself to the community with inconstructive remarks on other distributions is a bad start. Sure, people like to complain (myself included!) and the grass is always greener on the other side. TUs are however members of the Arch development team and are expected to work hand-in-hand with other distributions. The recent iniative on reproducible builds [2] which was started by Debian is an example of that. Arbitrary remarks like "if your computer CPU too little" or "packaging is too complicated" don't help here, nor are we flattered when Arch supposedly does these things better. > Also I developped a build status webpage, both the backend and the frontend, for archlinuxcn build server (lilac web status frontend). I certainly believe that you are apt at communicating and working with the archlinuxcn team. However, if you are interested at becoming TU we need to look at Arch as a whole. For example, if you plan on (assisting with) maintaing the ruby toolchain, how would the rest of team communicate with you on this? Your response to Davis's email gave me the impression of a severe language barrier, and having to use other TUs from archlinuxcn as intermediaries does not seem ideal to me. (Please note that I am not a native English speaker either, nor do I expect anyone to be. However, some control of the English language is expected when it is is used as the main means of communication in a development team.) [1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-December/034758.html [2] https://reproducible-builds.org/ -- Alad Wenter
Re: [aur-general] TU application_R: Metal A-wing (a-wing)
> > - [ ] source_x86_64: should be source, don't upload binary data to the > > AUR, > > > > About source binary. Improve the build speed of AUR, Reduce makedependence > The result of the build is the same This is a fundamental mis-understanding of both the purpose of the AUR and the purpose of source control: * The AUR absolutely should not be used to host binary files. Only source files should be hosted. This is documented on the wiki on the obvious page. [1] Hosting only sources has several advantages, most notably in the form of improving security: users can read the source of packages being compiled. * As a general rule, git/bzr/hg/etc repositories should only contain source code. This rule isn't specific to the AUR. It's a general software engineering principle. As a community member: this application *worries* me. [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository
Re: [aur-general] TU application_R: Metal A-wing (a-wing)
First of all, your email client has broken the email thread. ;)
On 1/9/19 11:20 AM, Metal A-wing wrote:
> Oh. yes
https://github.com/archlinux/archweb/ and
https://git.archlinux.org/aurweb.git/about/ (both are python, not ruby)
But these are community projects that can be contributed to even without
becoming a Trusted User.
>> * [ ] depends: single quotes missing
> ??? What ?
This is a style preference and therefore subjective.
>> * [ ] source_x86_64: should be source, don't upload binary data to the
>> AUR,
> About source binary. Improve the build speed of AUR, Reduce makedependence
> The result of the build is the same
Okay, this is a big issue. And it's not enough to say that you'll do
better in the official repos. This is a -bin package, plain and simple,
and users have an expectation that software is built from a vetted
source, not repackaged as some shady prebuilt binary. The AUR is not an
exception to this.
You cannot just say "Oh I've personally tested it and it's the same
byte-for-byte identical result, I promise". That's the exact opposite of
vetting software, and I doubt you're verifying it in private on every
single release when your CI bot rebuilds the package.
https://github.com/archlinuxcn/repo/commit/4182ad8ba05c9f6aa1944fb17b07f07fbc18ced9
This package shows and continues to show a lack of understanding about
what it means to be a Trusted User. And honestly it shows a lack of
understanding about what it means to be a community member with an AUR
account. You received a review that the package should build from source
and instead you change from source_x86_64=() to source=() and set the
package as an arch=('any') package even though it contains:
dbus.node: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV),
dynamically linked,
BuildID[sha1]=b641f5b2dd3faa26e9620add7eaf60b9a75d5a7a, not stripped
You neither understood the message that David was telling you, nor
bothered to check how your package worked when modifying it. Now your
package is more broken than it was yesterday, and you still haven't
fixed the main issue.
--
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [aur-general] TU application_R: Metal A-wing (a-wing)
Hi, Le 09/01/2019 à 17:20, Metal A-wing a écrit : >> * [ ] source_x86_64: should be source, don't upload binary data to the >> AUR, > About source binary. Improve the build speed of AUR, Reduce makedependence > The result of the build is the same What do you mean by “same” and how did you checked that? Regards, Bruno signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[aur-general] TU application_R: Metal A-wing (a-wing)
On Tue Jan 8 20:19:43 UTC 2019, David Runge wrote: > > I'm sorry, my last application was bad a few days ago. > Not so easy for reviews, if you're applying between Christmas and New > Years (lots of people are not home and/or busy hanging out with people > then). > > > I am a Web Developer. uav cloud management system dev in UAV company. > > (not DJI) > Would you also be interested in improving the AUR, and website? Oh. yes > > In 2017, I started Archlinux > That's not true! :-P > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Linux#History Sorry: In 2017, I started using archlinux > > About my involvement in Arch Linux, I have 11 packages on AUR [1]. > vrzvd 0.0.1 starting up... > > * electron-netease-cloud-music > * [x] electron-netease-cloud-music.sh: just call `/usr/bin/electron >/usr/lib/electron-netease-cloud-music/electron-netease-cloud-music.asar` >and remove the rest > * [ ] electron-netease-cloud-music.png: remove and download from upstream > if necessary > * [x] pkgdesc: clinet should be client > * [x] arch: not set! should be 'any' > * [x] license: should be 'GPL3' (see `pacman -Ql licenses`) > * [ ] depends: single quotes missing ??? What ? > * [ ] source_x86_64: should be source, don't upload binary data to the > AUR, About source binary. Improve the build speed of AUR, Reduce makedependence The result of the build is the same > * [x] md5sums_x86_64: should be md5sums > * [ ] prepare(): use gendesk to create the missing XDG desktop file > instead of adding it to the repository > * [ ] package(): cd to $srcdir is unnecessary, remove commented line > installing svg, asar should be called in prepare() to extract > LICENSE, LICENSE can be installed using 'install -t' ruby-rails * ruby-actionable * ruby-activejob * ruby-activestorage Upstream https://github.com/rails/rails Need split package ? > > I also maintains 52 packages in the unofficial [archlinuxcn] repo [2]. > Unfortunately it's not easy to see which, only by contribution: > https://github.com/archlinuxcn/repo/commit/e16a5eafc54f3b67c1805919a3b0af659f6ac701 > Do you have a list? ruby-actioncable flite1 acme.sh-git ruby-actionmailer annie ruby-railties hmcl ruby-erubi ruby-nokogiri ruby-erubis ruby-rack-test ruby-activejob ruby-minitest ruby-i18n electron-netease-cloud-music ruby-rails ruby-builder i3lock-color ruby-rails-dom-testing ruby-coderay ruby-rails-html-sanitizer ruby-arel ruby-websocket-extensions ruby-activerecord ruby-tzinfo frps ruby-actionview ruby-crass ruby-actionpack ruby-loofah python-hsaudiotag3k caddy ruby-sprockets-rails qgroundcontrol ruby-activemodel ruby-thread_safe frpc ruby-websocket-driver ruby-activesupport ruby-bacon ruby-method_source ruby-activestorage apm_planner ruby-marcel mattermost-desktop polybar ruby-pry websocketd ruby-hoe ruby-globalid ruby-sprockets ruby-mimemagic > > Many Web app rely on ruby-rails: mastodon, discourse, redmine, > > gitlab(But. gitlab need special version), so I think packaging > > ruby-rails will greatly benefit arch linux users to do development and > > deployment on their favorite distro more easily. > How do you plan on packaging ruby-rails? Would some of the gems > maintained by you be part of the package or separate gems? I don't know > too much about ruby and gems, which is why I'm asking ;-) Separate gems, looks like debian ruby-rails > What do you use to keep up-to-date with upstream releases? Use lilac, nvchecker. Automatically detect updates every day signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] Legal question - Arch Linux trademark on goodies - Transparency
On 01/09/19 at 03:16pm, William Gathoye wrote: > Hello everyone, > > First of all, following a discussion on Twitter, I wanted to know > whether this company is authorized to sell goodies (hoodies) with the > Arch Linux trademark on it? I know it is being listed on the > archlinux.org frontpage, but I wonder what's percentage is given to the > project as compensation [1]. As written on the website: "From your purchase we support free software, usually $3-5 from each product sold". > With FOSDEM behind the corner, there have been quite a few discussions > on social media and IRC recently regarding stands/community involvement > etc. A few questions have been raised wrt. trademark/acting on behalf of > the project, etc. and I wasn't able to find an answer on the Wiki. Who > can speak on behalf of the community, etc? Even if Arch Linux is a > meritocratic organization, do we have such a person inside our > community? Maybe it's the right time to fill the gap in the wiki? I think anyone can speak for the community, being a member of the community. There is however a clear disctinction between being a team member and being a community member. One adds more weight then the other. > To understand better the situation, let's imagine a few use cases. > > 1. Someone who wants to craft Arch Linux merchandising for him/herself > and others given free of charge. > > e.g. I attend FOSDEM and I want to show others I'm an Arch Linux > user. If another Arch Linux user passes by and ask me if I have goodies, > give them free of charge. I believe this falls under "Advocacy" of the Trademark policy. > 2. Someone wants to craft Arch Linux merchandising for others. No gain > other than the one to cover the fees of the company we are ordering from > e.g. Zazzle. > > e.g. An Arch Linux stand is organized at FOSDEM and I want to > organize it. I believe this is ok, not 100% sure. > 3. A magazine is asking the stand organizer to make an interview on > behalf of the community with a question like why do you have dropped > i686 compatibility? What is the project direction for the next few > years, etc. Anyone can be interviewed, but I wouldn't say you can claim to be a representative of the project if you aren't on the team. > 4. Someone wants to give money to the project. Can he receive a document > for taxing purpose? See http://www.spi-inc.org/donations/ > What is the legal process for these aforementioned use cases? According > to the trademark rules, we have to ask the the Arch Linux Project Lead > for "merchandising purposes".[2] Does asking money to the end user to > cover charge can be considered as a commercial activity even if we are > not making profits? Are we allowed to answer questions that could > involve the whole community? > > When someone is donating money to the project, who is receiving it? How > can we have transparency about the IN/OUT of the treasury (server cost? > etc.). What is the legal structure behind Arch Linux? Are we a > foundation like The Document Foundation? See, what Morten said. Basically all your donations pay for server hosting and SPI costs :-) > When a stand is organized for a particular event, does the Arch Linux > organization participate in the funding? I haven't been able to find > such an information on the Wiki. Anyone can organize a stand and promote Arch. Don't know if we ever paid for one. > Because asking for the end user to pay > for his/her on goodies is not something that can have much success, > especially when the Fedora/Mageia/RedHat/Debian community is giving > everything for free in such an event. Not entirely sure about that point. > For the record, even if I have been participating to FOSDEM since 2012 > and have adopted Arch Linux as my daily OS since that date, I haven't > been able to see an Arch Linux stand yet. The only things I heard of: > > * a small lightning talk about pacman and the way packages are being built > * some goodies informally given by the ex. Trusted User Andrea Scarpino. > > Do we maintain a list of events whose topic was Arch Linux (other than > having to dig into the arch-event mailing list)? Only arch-events as long as I have been around, other then that some meetups over the past years with fellow members from the team. > Wrt. identity, do we have strict guidelines to follow (e.g. distances, > fonts to be used along side the logo, etc.) other than the short notice > from our Logo Usage Guidelines of our trademark policy page? [3] > > I know these questions come as a burst, but I thank you already for the > answers you could give to me. > > [1] https://www.hellotux.com/arch > > [2] > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:TrademarkPolicy#Restricted_use_that_requires_a_trademark_license > > [3] > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:TrademarkPolicy#Logo_Usage_Guidelines > > -- > William Gathoye > > -- Jelle van der Waa signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [aur-general] Legal question - Arch Linux trademark on goodies - Transparency
Im unsure why this was posted to aur-general and not arch-general? Probably wrong ML. On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 03:16:09PM +0100, William Gathoye wrote: > When someone is donating money to the project, who is receiving it? How > can we have transparency about the IN/OUT of the treasury (server cost? > etc.). What is the legal structure behind Arch Linux? Are we a > foundation like The Document Foundation? Economy is handled by SPI and can be viewed in the annual reports they publish. https://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/annual-reports/ And treasury reports: https://www.spi-inc.org/treasurer/reports/201712/ I don't find anything for 2018 yet. But I assume that will be published soon. -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[aur-general] Legal question - Arch Linux trademark on goodies - Transparency
Hello everyone, First of all, following a discussion on Twitter, I wanted to know whether this company is authorized to sell goodies (hoodies) with the Arch Linux trademark on it? I know it is being listed on the archlinux.org frontpage, but I wonder what's percentage is given to the project as compensation [1]. With FOSDEM behind the corner, there have been quite a few discussions on social media and IRC recently regarding stands/community involvement etc. A few questions have been raised wrt. trademark/acting on behalf of the project, etc. and I wasn't able to find an answer on the Wiki. Who can speak on behalf of the community, etc? Even if Arch Linux is a meritocratic organization, do we have such a person inside our community? Maybe it's the right time to fill the gap in the wiki? To understand better the situation, let's imagine a few use cases. 1. Someone who wants to craft Arch Linux merchandising for him/herself and others given free of charge. e.g. I attend FOSDEM and I want to show others I'm an Arch Linux user. If another Arch Linux user passes by and ask me if I have goodies, give them free of charge. 2. Someone wants to craft Arch Linux merchandising for others. No gain other than the one to cover the fees of the company we are ordering from e.g. Zazzle. e.g. An Arch Linux stand is organized at FOSDEM and I want to organize it. 3. A magazine is asking the stand organizer to make an interview on behalf of the community with a question like why do you have dropped i686 compatibility? What is the project direction for the next few years, etc. 4. Someone wants to give money to the project. Can he receive a document for taxing purpose? What is the legal process for these aforementioned use cases? According to the trademark rules, we have to ask the the Arch Linux Project Lead for "merchandising purposes".[2] Does asking money to the end user to cover charge can be considered as a commercial activity even if we are not making profits? Are we allowed to answer questions that could involve the whole community? When someone is donating money to the project, who is receiving it? How can we have transparency about the IN/OUT of the treasury (server cost? etc.). What is the legal structure behind Arch Linux? Are we a foundation like The Document Foundation? When a stand is organized for a particular event, does the Arch Linux organization participate in the funding? I haven't been able to find such an information on the Wiki. Because asking for the end user to pay for his/her on goodies is not something that can have much success, especially when the Fedora/Mageia/RedHat/Debian community is giving everything for free in such an event. For the record, even if I have been participating to FOSDEM since 2012 and have adopted Arch Linux as my daily OS since that date, I haven't been able to see an Arch Linux stand yet. The only things I heard of: * a small lightning talk about pacman and the way packages are being built * some goodies informally given by the ex. Trusted User Andrea Scarpino. Do we maintain a list of events whose topic was Arch Linux (other than having to dig into the arch-event mailing list)? Wrt. identity, do we have strict guidelines to follow (e.g. distances, fonts to be used along side the logo, etc.) other than the short notice from our Logo Usage Guidelines of our trademark policy page? [3] I know these questions come as a burst, but I thank you already for the answers you could give to me. [1] https://www.hellotux.com/arch [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:TrademarkPolicy#Restricted_use_that_requires_a_trademark_license [3] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:TrademarkPolicy#Logo_Usage_Guidelines -- William Gathoye signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
