On 6 December 2013 17:25, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
> Bartłomiej Piotrowski proposed packaging standard changes:
Where is this proposal? I think he simply meant that it is the current practice.
> if there are 2 versions of some package foobar, then older version (1.0
> for example) must be named as
On Friday 06 December 2013 06:04:37 Anatol Pomozov wrote:
> I repacked and cleaned gem2arch. Could you please merge
>
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gem2arch-ruby/
>
> into
>
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gem2arch/
Done too.
--
С уважением, Е.Алексеев.
Sincerely yours, E.Alekseev.
Hi,
Thanks.
I repacked and cleaned gem2arch. Could you please merge
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gem2arch-ruby/
into
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gem2arch/
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Evgeniy Alekseev wrote:
> On Thursday 05 December 2013 22:04:53 Anatol Pomozov wrote:
>> I
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Bartłomiej Piotrowski proposed packaging standard changes:
> if there are 2 versions of some package foobar, then older version (1.0
> for example) must be named as foobar1-1.0 and newer version (2.0 for
> example) must be named as
On 12/06/13 at 10:22am, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> > On 06.12.2013 10:45, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
> >> At Fri, 06 Dec 2013 09:42:11 +0001,
> >> Maxime Gauduin wrote:
> >>> I would chang
On 06.12.2013 11:31, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
> At Fri, 6 Dec 2013 10:22:35 +,
> Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>> Sensitive topic: Why doesn't arch support multiple versions for the
>> same packages?
> Another sensitive topic is removing packages without notification
> refering to nonexistent rule.
>
>
At Fri, 6 Dec 2013 10:22:35 +,
Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> Sensitive topic: Why doesn't arch support multiple versions for the
> same packages?
Another sensitive topic is removing packages without notification
refering to nonexistent rule.
WTF? :S
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote:
> On 06.12.2013 10:45, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
>> At Fri, 06 Dec 2013 09:42:11 +0001,
>> Maxime Gauduin wrote:
>>> I would change that rule a bit, because wxgtk is a special case. The
>>> 2.9
On 06.12.2013 10:45, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
> At Fri, 06 Dec 2013 09:42:11 +0001,
> Maxime Gauduin wrote:
>> I would change that rule a bit, because wxgtk is a special case. The
>> 2.9 branch is a devel branch, keeping wxgtk for the stable branch and
>> adding a suffix for the devel branch makes
At Fri, 06 Dec 2013 09:42:11 +0001,
Maxime Gauduin wrote:
>
> >
> I would change that rule a bit, because wxgtk is a special case. The
> 2.9 branch is a devel branch, keeping wxgtk for the stable branch and
> adding a suffix for the devel branch makes sense. Speaking of wxgtk,
> now that 3.0
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Sergej Pupykin wrote:
Hi,
Bartłomiej Piotrowski proposed packaging standard changes:
if there are 2 versions of some package foobar, then older version
(1.0
for example) must be named as foobar1-1.0 and newer version (2.0 for
example) must be named as fooba
Hi,
Bartłomiej Piotrowski proposed packaging standard changes:
if there are 2 versions of some package foobar, then older version (1.0
for example) must be named as foobar1-1.0 and newer version (2.0 for
example) must be named as foobar-2.0.
I did not see such rule yet on
https://wiki.archlinux.
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 4 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 2 fully signed off packages
* 100 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 day
On Friday 06 December 2013 00:58:11 Doug Newgard wrote:
> **DELETE**
>
> Dead, source gone:
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/triplexinvaders/
> (with that name, I don't want to hunt too hard for alternative on this one
> :D) https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/hunnyb/
> https://aur.archlinux.
On Thursday 05 December 2013 22:04:53 Anatol Pomozov wrote:
> I own several packages with the same functionality.
>
> packages
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gem2arch/
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gem2arch-git/
>
> should be removed as their upstream project is dead. In fact its
> f
15 matches
Mail list logo