Re: [aur-general] TU application: hashworks

2020-06-08 Thread Jonas Witschel via aur-general
Hi hashworks,

On 2020-06-08 15:08, hashworks via aur-general wrote:
> My name is Justin Kromlinger aka hashworks and I'm applying as a
> Trusted User with the sponsorship of Thore Bödecker aka foxxx0 and
> Christian Rebischke aka shibumi who recently reviewed my AUR packages
> [1] – thanks for that! Some may know me from freenode#archlinux.de,
> where I'm lingering since a few years. I am and will be reachable there
> anytime.

I have had a quick look over your AUR packages and found some issues:

brickstrap-git: should provide and conflict on "brickstrap" (even though
there is currently no such AUR package, it would be easy to create one
at any time given upstream has stable releases).

certbot-dns-hetzner-git: remove the leading "v" in pkgver, see [1].

dns-zone-blacklist-git: missing provides and conflicts on
"dns-zone-blacklist".

goaccess-git: remove the leading "v" in pkgver, use 'make
DESTDIR="$pkgdir" install' instead of 'prefix="$pkgdir/usr"
sysconfdir="$pkgdir/etc"'.

i3blocks-contrib: remove the useless provides and conflicts entries for
itself.

mustache: since this package only installs an architecture-independent
header file, it should be arch=('any').

pam-ihosts: remove the makedepends on "gcc" and "binutils" since they
are in base-devel [2].

pam-ihosts-git: remove the makedepends on base-devel packages, arch
should be "x86_64" instead of "any" (like pam-ihosts).

prismatik-bin: the package currently conflicts on "prismatik-psieg",
which prismatik-sieg-git doesn't even provide. Just let prismatik-bin
conflict on prismatik instead (like you already do for prismatik-psieg-git).

zimwriterfs: arch should be "x86_64" instead of "any", also the upstream
repository has recently been archived in favour of "zim-tools".
> For most of my packages I use a personal GitLab instance to verify the
> builds with a pipeline [3] and since a while the process of new
> releases is automated.

I like the sound of that! Out of curiosity, do you trigger builds for
every upstream commit of VCS packages, or is it linked to committing new
revisions of a PKGBUILD file?

Best of luck with your application!

Jonas

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_package_guidelines#Git

[2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PKGBUILD#makedepends



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] Anydesk 404 not found

2020-03-01 Thread Jonas Witschel via aur-general
On 2020-03-01 18:59, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 3/1/20 12:56 PM, Frederick Zhang via aur-general wrote:
>> Sorry please ignore my last comment since apparently it was replaced by
>> anydesk-debian [1].
>>
>> [1] 
>> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-requests/2020-February/037952.html
> This... doesn't even make much sense at all. What is the point of having
> so many packages for the same thing?

The difference between anydesk-bin and anydesk-debian is that the latter
uses a custom version of pango because the most recent one seems to
cause issues for some people, see the package comments.

At the time of accepting PRQ#18092, I thought that the binary from the
Debian package was built differently than the one provided by the
.tar.gz file, but that is actually not the case apparently, so
"anydesk-debian" might not be the most fitting name.

Since upstream is closed source, the package anydesk-bin using  system
pango could now be renamed to "anydesk".

Best,
Jonas



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] Spam

2020-01-09 Thread Jonas Witschel via aur-general
On 2020-01-09 11:33, Michael Duell wrote:
> User `hellyjanes900` is spamming at [2]
> 
> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/hellyjanes900/
> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/android-studio/

Thank you, I removed the comment and deleted the account.

Cheers,
Jonas



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [aur-general] SPAM user account

2019-10-21 Thread Jonas Witschel via aur-general
On 2019-10-21 10:02, John wrote:
> Please see the latest comment in the following package which I believe
> to be made by a SPAM user.  Any chance to delete the comment too?

Thanks, I deleted all comments made by the spam account "imaran786".

Cheers,
Jonas



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature