Re: [aur-general] Moving xss-lock to community

Original Message On January 19, 2018 11:52 AM, David Runge wrote: >Fwitw (and sorry for hijacking), I recently tried xprintidle (with a forked >upstream, different from the one in the AUR) and it seems to work. > This might still be used in a script to lock

Re: [aur-general] Moving xss-lock to community

On January 19, 2018 9:42:26 AM GMT+01:00, Bennett Piater wrote: > > >On 01/18/2018 09:37 PM, Alad Wenter via aur-general wrote: >> See the bug report I linked in the first reply. >> >>

Re: [aur-general] [tu-bylaws] [PATCH] Clarify the process for Special Removal of an inactive TU

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 06:18:11PM -0500, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote: > +2. performed any action that required TU privileges on the AUR, for example > +resolving package requests, modifying user accounts, or force pushing to a > +package base, but NOT including participation in a voting

Re: [aur-general] Moving xss-lock to community

On 01/18/2018 09:37 PM, Alad Wenter via aur-general wrote: > See the bug report I linked in the first reply. > > https://bitbucket.org/raymonad/xss-lock/issues/17/does-not-report-activity-to-systemd-logind Right, that is actually something else than what I did. I used `xset s` to trigger on

Re: [aur-general] [tu-bylaws] [PATCH] Clarify the process for Special Removal of an inactive TU

On 19 January 2018 at 00:18, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote: > Not everything that is available only to an aurweb account of the > Trusted User type, qualifies as a TU "privilege" > > Signed-off-by: Eli Schwartz > --- > > Handy link to