On 2 June 2012 11:21, Connor Behan wrote:
> On 01/06/12 08:17 PM, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
>> Given that this question ("is arm/ppc allowed in AUR?") has had a bit
>> of mixed responses, can I expect a bit more of discussion on this, or
>> should I consider the "no" final? Thanks,
>
> I wouldn'
On 01/06/12 08:17 PM, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
> Given that this question ("is arm/ppc allowed in AUR?") has had a bit
> of mixed responses, can I expect a bit more of discussion on this, or
> should I consider the "no" final? Thanks,
I wouldn't consider the "no" final. If you put a PKGBUILD i
On 2012-06-01 03:17, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> On 01/06/12 02:31, Loui Chang wrote:
>> On Thu 31 May 2012 09:56 -0300, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
>>> On 2012-05-31 08:10, Phillip Smith wrote:
On 31 May 2012 17:38, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
> When I first though about it, I wanted to say
On 2012-06-01 17:42, Xyne wrote:
> Heiko Baums wrote:
>
>> Am Fri, 1 Jun 2012 20:20:14 +0200
>> schrieb Marcin 'sirmacik' Karpezo :
>>
> Um, I don't think you understood his idea, but at least it didn't stop you
> from
> replying with your usual abrasive tone.
>
> Simplified version:
> User F
On 2012-06-01 17:28, Xyne wrote:
> Loui Chang wrote:
>
>>> It may be a bit of chicken-and-egg, though. The ppc/arm userbase might
>>> grow if arch is seen stable enough and seems to have sufficient
>>> packages, possibly making it worth being supported, but the lack of
>>> infrastructure won't ma
Am Sat, 02 Jun 2012 01:23:46 +0200
schrieb Christian Stadegaart :
> You were not sharing an opinion, you were sharing facts, right? I
> advise you to be careful with the words you choose.
Why? Answer my questions, and you will see that it's true. In the most
cases you will come to the same conclu
Am Sat, 2 Jun 2012 01:23:30 +0200
schrieb Cédric Girard :
> On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Heiko Baums
> wrote:
>
> > Btw., I read at least one comment in the AUR in which the old
> > maintainer asked to be removed from the #Contributor flag in the
> > PKGBUILD. So I think that not everybody wo
Zaterdag 2 Juni 2012 om 01:04 (CEST +0200) schreef Heiko Baums:
Am I not allowed to answer, particularly if I think the idea is
pointless? And, no, it is not an abrasive tone. Those are just facts.
And I had the impression that Marcin didn't think about the reasons why
a package is usually (in m
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Btw., I read at least one comment in the AUR in which the old
> maintainer asked to be removed from the #Contributor flag in the
> PKGBUILD. So I think that not everybody would be happy with such a
> previous maintainer field in the AUR.
>
See
2012/6/2 Heiko Baums
> >I already understood this. This doesn't change anything. Still no reason
> >for an automation. In those very rare cases I guess the previous
> >maintainer still knows which packages he had maintained, and wants to
> >continue maintaining. So he already can easily search fo
Am Fri, 1 Jun 2012 20:42:47 +
schrieb Xyne :
> Um, I don't think you understood his idea,
I think I did understand his idea.
> but at least it didn't
> stop you from replying with your usual abrasive tone.
Am I not allowed to answer, particularly if I think the idea is
pointless? And, no, i
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Xyne wrote:
> Now that the request is clear, I will say that I don't think this should be
> done on the AUR itself. As already mentioned, there are not many users who
> drop everything in the AUR and then come back (even if "they always come
> back").
>
I don't t
Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Fri, 1 Jun 2012 20:20:14 +0200
> schrieb Marcin 'sirmacik' Karpezo :
>
> > I think you misunderstood me. It's not about taking packages back if
> > they are maintained. It's about giving orphaned packages back to the
> > previous maintainer if they are still orphaned and h
Loui Chang wrote:
> > It may be a bit of chicken-and-egg, though. The ppc/arm userbase might
> > grow if arch is seen stable enough and seems to have sufficient
> > packages, possibly making it worth being supported, but the lack of
> > infrastructure won't make that so possible.
>
> Yes, I also
Am Fri, 1 Jun 2012 20:20:14 +0200
schrieb Marcin 'sirmacik' Karpezo :
> I think you misunderstood me. It's not about taking packages back if
> they are maintained. It's about giving orphaned packages back to the
> previous maintainer if they are still orphaned and he has logged in
> again and push
Dnia 2012-06-01, o godz. 12:11:06
Alex Belanger napisał(a):
> Such tracking is usually done within the MAKEPKG file, e.g. [1]. It is
> indeed better practice but not mandatory. As long as we can contact
> the current maintainer, why the need of previous maintainer?
>
> Second it doesn't really m
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Mikhail Mikhailov wrote:
> Hello,
> 2gis package is out of date, maintainer does not answer. Please, disown the
> package.
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25266
Done, thanks.
Hello,
2gis package is out of date, maintainer does not answer. Please, disown
the package.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25266
Such tracking is usually done within the MAKEPKG file, e.g. [1]. It is
indeed better practice but not mandatory. As long as we can contact the
current maintainer, why the need of previous maintainer?
Second it doesn't really matter who owns the package. We all contribute to
Arch together and benef
On Jun 1, 2012 10:03 PM, "Marcin 'sirmacik' Karpezo" <
mar...@karpezo.pl> wrote:
>
> Hi there!
>
> Few days ago I’ve installed Archlinux on my laptop again. One of the
> first changes I’ve noticed in my *.archlinux.org accounts was loosing
> all packages I was maintaining in AUR.
>
> It’s completel
Hi there!
Few days ago I’ve installed Archlinux on my laptop again. One of the
first changes I’ve noticed in my *.archlinux.org accounts was loosing
all packages I was maintaining in AUR.
It’s completely understandable because I was the one to say in one of
my comments that I hope to never use A
ibus-pinyin-libpinyin-git has been replaced by ibus-libpinyin-git
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 143 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 day
23 matches
Mail list logo
