Re: [aur-general] font package category in AUR?

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 10:34 PM, johnea wrote: > I agree. This would be very useful. Could you make a feature request for this on the Arch bug tracker? Jason >>> Done: >>> https://bugs.archlinux.org/**task/34666 >>> >> >> Except you

Re: [aur-general] font package category in AUR?

I agree. This would be very useful. Could you make a feature request for this on the Arch bug tracker? Jason Done: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/34666 Except you probably should have put it in the aur section of the bug tracker. - -- Daniel Wallace Arch Linux Trusted User GTManfred I did

Re: [aur-general] font package category in AUR?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 johnea wrote: >On 04/07/2013 04:36 PM, Jason St. John wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:08 PM, johnea wrote: >>> >>> I did a quick search to see if this has been discussed before, but >found nothing. >>> >>> It seems it would help organization if

Re: [aur-general] Merge request: pysces, python2-sundials

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Michael Schubert wrote: > Dear TUs, > > Please merge: > > python2-pysces [1] => pysces [2] > [1] > https://aur.archlinux.org/**packages/python2-pysces/ > [2] > https://aur.archlinux.org/**packages/pysces/

Re: [aur-general] font package category in AUR?

On 04/07/2013 04:36 PM, Jason St. John wrote: On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:08 PM, johnea wrote: I did a quick search to see if this has been discussed before, but found nothing. It seems it would help organization if there was a "font" category for AUR packages. Font are in all kinds of catego

Re: [aur-general] font package category in AUR?

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:08 PM, johnea wrote: > > I did a quick search to see if this has been discussed before, but found > nothing. > > It seems it would help organization if there was a "font" category for AUR > packages. > > Font are in all kinds of categories, and with inconsistent names. T

Re: [aur-general] Delete request - chromium-browser-ppa (and related)

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Jakub Klinkovský wrote: > Please delete these packages, the sources are fetched from an out-of-date repo > (last update was a year ago), previous mainainer disowned them today after I > sent him an email. > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/chromium-browser-ppa/ >

[aur-general] Delete request - chromium-browser-ppa (and related)

Please delete these packages, the sources are fetched from an out-of-date repo (last update was a year ago), previous mainainer disowned them today after I sent him an email. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/chromium-browser-ppa/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/chromium-browser-inspector-ppa/

[aur-general] font package category in AUR?

I did a quick search to see if this has been discussed before, but found nothing. It seems it would help organization if there was a "font" category for AUR packages. Font are in all kinds of categories, and with inconsistent names. This makes it difficult to separate fonts from utilities and

[aur-general] Merge and deletion requests

Hello Some packages that can be removed or merged with others: To Merge: yturl: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/yturl/ See comment. New package yturl-git ( https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/yturl-git/ ). deadbeef-devel-git: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/deadbeef-devel-git/ Same lik

[aur-general] I think we're ready for GNOME 3.8 in [testing]

Salve, citizens! I think we're ready to push GNOME 3.8 into [testing], so our TUs can start doing the necessary [community] updates. What to do (from memory): - Move contents of [gnome-unstable] to [testing] - Get [community-testing] updates going. This affects IIRC packages using libgee and js

Re: [aur-general] Duplicate Package Removal and Disown Request

On 2013-04-07 23:56, Maxime GAUDUIN wrote: I understand, still the protocol requires you to send an email to the current maintainer. Only after 2 weeks without an answer can I disown it for you. Ping me again when it's done :) Ahh, I had forgotten that was still the case with such a long delay.

Re: [aur-general] Duplicate Package Removal and Disown Request

On Apr 7, 2013 11:47 PM, "Sam Stuewe" wrote: > > On 2013-04-07 23:15, Maxime GAUDUIN wrote: >> >> Deleted hashcat-bin, thx. > > > Anytime. Given the several month long break between updates for hashcat, will the package be disowned? I have an updated and overhauled package ready to be uploaded. As

Re: [aur-general] Duplicate Package Removal and Disown Request

On 2013-04-07 23:15, Maxime GAUDUIN wrote: Deleted hashcat-bin, thx. Anytime. Given the several month long break between updates for hashcat, will the package be disowned? I have an updated and overhauled package ready to be uploaded. As I mentioned, it has been several months since the main

Re: [aur-general] ttf-google-webfonts{,-distilled,-git,-hg} mess

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Maxime GAUDUIN wrote: > On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Marcel Korpel wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Maxime GAUDUIN wrote: >> > I mostly agree with you, but I would still keep the git package because >> I, >> > and I believe most people, don't want t

Re: [aur-general] Duplicate Package Removal and Disown Request

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Sam Stuewe wrote: > On 2013-04-07 16:57, Sam Stuewe wrote: > >> hashcat-bin [1] is very out-of-date and no longer serves a purpose as >> far as I can tell. Upstream packages the GUI separately, so the >> default package is the binary only anyway. Thus, the naming of

Re: [aur-general] ttf-google-webfonts{,-distilled,-git,-hg} mess

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Marcel Korpel wrote: > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Maxime GAUDUIN wrote: > > I mostly agree with you, but I would still keep the git package because > I, > > and I believe most people, don't want to pull 2Gb from the mercurial repo > > and keep them lying aro

Re: [aur-general] Delete request

Am 06.04.2013 17:36, schrieb Evangelos Foutras: On 6 April 2013 17:39, Stefan Husmann wrote: Hello, please remove https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/conkeror-refactor-completions-git/ It pulls from a branch, but AFAIK pacman 4.1 cannot handle that. Sure it can: https://wiki.archlinux.org/in

Re: [aur-general] ttf-google-webfonts{,-distilled,-git,-hg} mess

On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Maxime GAUDUIN wrote: > I mostly agree with you, but I would still keep the git package because I, > and I believe most people, don't want to pull 2Gb from the mercurial repo > and keep them lying around. This is painfully slow and, even though 2Gb are > nothing to

[aur-general] Merge request: pysces, python2-sundials

Dear TUs, Please merge: python2-pysces [1] => pysces [2] [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python2-pysces/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pysces/ python2-pysundials [3] => python2-sundials [4] [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pack

Re: [aur-general] quoting

On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Gesh wrote: > I believe that excessively quoting, > and in particular quoting the entirety of the original email, > is a cause for annoyance and that one should therefore only quote the > snippets from the original email that are relevant to one's new email. 100% ag

Re: [aur-general] Duplicate Package Removal and Disown Request

On 2013-04-07 16:57, Sam Stuewe wrote: hashcat-bin [1] is very out-of-date and no longer serves a purpose as far as I can tell. Upstream packages the GUI separately, so the default package is the binary only anyway. Thus, the naming of the package is redundant, it doesn't follow the naming conven

[aur-general] Duplicate Package Removal and Disown Request

hashcat-bin [1] is very out-of-date and no longer serves a purpose as far as I can tell. Upstream packages the GUI separately, so the default package is the binary only anyway. Thus, the naming of the package is redundant, it doesn't follow the naming convention upstream and the sources it uses

Re: [aur-general] merge request - chromium-stable-libpdf

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Jakub Klinkovský wrote: > Please merge chromium-stable-libpdf [1] into better named chromium-libpdf > [2] > (not chromium-libpdf-stable, [1] was related to chromium-stable package, > which > is now gone). The maintainer of [1] agreed to give up the package - see > c

[aur-general] merge request - chromium-stable-libpdf

Please merge chromium-stable-libpdf [1] into better named chromium-libpdf [2] (not chromium-libpdf-stable, [1] was related to chromium-stable package, which is now gone). The maintainer of [1] agreed to give up the package - see comments. [1]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/chromium-stable-lib

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 24 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 0 fully signed off packages * 30 packages missing signoffs * 6 packages older than 14 day