Re: [arch-dev-public] Anatol is inactive due to situation in Belarus

Wish you all the best, Anatol. Stay safe and good luck out there, we're all with you and your country. On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 2:30 AM Anatol Pomozov via arch-dev-public < arch-dev-public@archlinux.org> wrote: > Hello folks > > My name is Anatol Pomozov and I am an Arch Linux developer. I've

[arch-dev-public] Using SPDX License list as identifiers

Hi This just came up on IRC. Thoughts on using the SPDX license list as valid license identifiers for all packages? https://spdx.org/licenses/ Most of the identifiers would change but we would have a consistent and much larger, externally-maintained list to choose from. It would also be a little

Re: [arch-dev-public] Spring cleaning (take 2)

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 5:20 PM Antonio Rojas via arch-dev-public wrote: > > Following up on xyproto's [community] cleanup, here is a list of unrequired > orphans in [extra] which could be removed (minus the aspell/hunspell > dicts). Please adopt them if you want to keep them (some of them are >

Re: [arch-dev-public] FOSDEM 2019

Sounds good. I'll be there. I live nearby as well so if anyone needs help with something, feel free to email me. J. Leclanche On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 2:09 PM Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote: > > Yo! > > Last year at FOSDEM we where quite a few members from the Arch team present, > and

Re: [arch-dev-public] Improving overall experience for contributors

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote: > What I would be inclined to accept would be that packages are, at least at > first, always > co-maintained by sponsor and sponsored TU. This way we can assure that new > TU's can handle > ll the tasks related

Re: [arch-dev-public] OpenSSL 1.1.0

On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > Hi, > > I just moved the OpenSSL 1.1.0 and libgit2 0.25 rebuilds to [testing]. > Please report issues to the bug tracker. > > Regards, > Lukas Heads up, uwsgi breaks with OpenSSL 1.1:

Re: [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS: Brainstorming

[IANAL, the following is not legal advice] On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > Let us start with the ToS: > > * Introduction saying that using the service means accepting the terms. > * Liability clause, say that users are responsible for uploaded

Re: [arch-dev-public] Mesa, Nvidia and libglvnd (the good, the bad and the ugly) :)

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 8:22 PM, Laurent Carlier via arch-dev-public wrote: > Nvidia provides for several releases libglvnd support which mean the hability > to have serveral libgl installed without hacks (nvidia-libgl, mesa-libgl > currently). With Fedora providing

Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping udisks 1

In reading that I realized the udisks dependency in pcmanfm-qt is a noop (it's all handled in gvfs). I have removed it. J. Leclanche On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Balló György via arch-dev-public wrote: > Following our series on dropping packages, I think we

Re: [arch-dev-public] Long out of date packages

> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/any/firefox-firebug/ We shouldn't really be packaging Firefox extensions... J. Leclanche On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Antonio Rojas wrote: > Florian Pritz via arch-dev-public wrote: >> Can everyone please either update

Re: [arch-dev-public] pacman-5.0 is in [testing]

Lots of useful additions in there! Am I to understand pacman -Fs basically replaces the need for pkgfile? On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Allan McRae wrote: > https://projects.archlinux.org/pacman.git/tree/NEWS?h=v5.0.0

Re: [arch-dev-public] FOSDEM 2016 participation (please reply until Wednesday if you are interested)

On 5 October 2015 at 13:48, Maxime Gauduin wrote: > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > >> Hello guys, >> >> a user I met at FrOSCon this year and last year wants to organize an >> Arch Linux Devroom at FOSDEM on January 30th/31st

Re: [arch-dev-public] git packages and checksums

On 19 July 2015 at 05:43, Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org wrote: [2015-07-18 22:32:47 -0400] Dave Reisner: Tags are more explicitly published by upstreams than commit hashes. I'm not sure I understand the benefit of switching. Why is it preferrable to use the value rather than the pointer?

Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping vi and adding vim-minimal to the installation image

On 21 April 2015 at 22:32, Evangelos Foutras evange...@foutrelis.com wrote: On 21/04/15 16:27, Allan McRae wrote: What happened to adding a symlink? Now there is no vi in base, many packages there are broken out of the box - sudo (visudo), bash (bashbug), less (when pressing v). There is

Re: [arch-dev-public] Dropping vi and adding vim-minimal to the installation image

On 29 March 2015 at 18:07, Anatol Pomozov anatol.pomo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Evangelos Foutras evange...@foutrelis.com wrote: This was discussed about two years ago but no action was taken. The proposal is simple: - Drop the vi package from the repos -

Re: [arch-dev-public] user/group management in packages

2015-02-03 12:46 GMT+01:00 Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org: 1) We should not remove users/groups when packages are uninstalled. This is a potential security issue if any files are left owned by the non-existent user/group. When should the cleanup be done? Installing and immediately