On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 14:01 Sam S. wrote:
> > Note that we do keep the Git repositories of deleted packages,
> > so if anybody wants to maintain the package later, he can always clone
> > the repository of the deleted package, fix the package and simply push
> > it afterwards
>
> Can you give some
> Note that we do keep the Git repositories of deleted packages,
> so if anybody wants to maintain the package later, he can always clone
> the repository of the deleted package, fix the package and simply push
> it afterwards
Can you give some details on that?
For example the libtiff4 package (w
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:05:08 +0200
Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> I consider this a slight abuse of the orphan/disown functionality.
Oh, and I also wanted to point out that this is just one use-case. There are
others, such as the v8 package that was recently dropped from [community] to
the AUR. Should
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:05:08 +0200
Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> I consider this a slight abuse of the orphan/disown functionality.
> Wikipedia defines orphan as
>
> [...] a child whose parents are dead or have abandoned them
> permanently.
>
> In my opinion, orphan packages should be defined
>> So maybe we need to improve the way changing maintainership
>> works. Having a "Give up for adoption" button (that keeps the current
>> maintainer while allowing anybody to adopt the package) in addition to
>> "Disown" is one possibility.
> What is the point of the "disown" button then, if it d
Em 12-08-2015 06:05, Lukas Fleischer escreveu:
> Maybe you could at least add yourself as a co-maintainer for now. Or if
> you are really *actively* trying to find new maintainers, it probably
> wouldn't hurt if you were listed as a maintainer until you find
> somebody.
I had some dependencies iss
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Lukas Fleischer
wrote:
> Wikipedia defines orphan as
>
> [...] a child whose parents are dead or have abandoned them
> permanently
...but new parents may want to adopt them, if given the opportunity.
Deleting *long-time* orphaned packages may increase th
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 at 05:49:58, Doug Newgard wrote:
> [...]
> You're making one massive and incorrect assumption: that packages that don't
> have an official "Maintainer" listed are broken. But you have no idea why
> they're orphaned.
>
> In my case, I have some that I'm actively trying to get ma
Le 12 août 2015 07:51:28 GMT+02:00, Justin Dray a écrit :
>On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 at 15:37 Rob McCathie wrote:
>
>> On 12/08/15 13:49, Doug Newgard wrote:
>> > In my case, I have some that I'm actively trying to get maintainers
>> > for; in the mean time, I'm looking after them even though they ar
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 at 15:37 Rob McCathie wrote:
> On 12/08/15 13:49, Doug Newgard wrote:
> > In my case, I have some that I'm actively trying to get maintainers
> > for; in the mean time, I'm looking after them even though they are
> > listed as being orphaned. Is this not to be allowed now? Sho
On 12/08/15 13:49, Doug Newgard wrote:
In my case, I have some that I'm actively trying to get maintainers
for; in the mean time, I'm looking after them even though they are
listed as being orphaned. Is this not to be allowed now? Should all
"orphan" packages in the official repos be deleted, j
>
> Several notification emails were sent directly rather than via aur-general.
>
>
Yes, but that isn't the same thing. Being subscribed to the list would
(should?) have made people aware of most of the issues surrounding the
migration, including the motivations behind it and the expectations of
ma
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 05:16:03 +0200
Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There seems to be quite some confusion about the package migration
> process and about package deletion. I would like to clarify my point of
> view. Hopefully it serves as a basis for discussion (i.e. technical
> discussion with
> Thanks for clarifying your point of view Lukas. I think some AUR
> maintainers are out-of-the-loop on the migration issues, for one reason or
> another. I suspect some simply weren't subscribed to this list over the
> last few months.
Several notification emails were sent directly rather than vi
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Lukas Fleischer
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There seems to be quite some confusion about the package migration
> process and about package deletion. I would like to clarify my point of
> view. Hopefully it serves as a basis for discussion (i.e. technical
> discussion withou
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:23 PM, David Phillips
wrote:
> I suppose some may subscribe to the view that if someone wants it
> badly enough, they'll submit, maintain and stick with it.
>
Exactly.
Hi,
There seems to be quite some confusion about the package migration
process and about package deletion. I would like to clarify my point of
view. Hopefully it serves as a basis for discussion (i.e. technical
discussion without attacking anybody personally).
As already mentioned a couple of tim
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 07:24 David Phillips wrote:
> I suppose some may subscribe to the view that if someone wants it
> badly enough, they'll submit, maintain and stick with it.
>
In my case, I uploaded a perfectly working package for LSI raid
controllers, but someone commented that a newer version
I suppose some may subscribe to the view that if someone wants it
badly enough, they'll submit, maintain and stick with it.
David Kaylor
Wrote in message:
> - Second, uploading something to AUR4 then immediately orphaning it is
> stupid. Why not just hold onto it for a while and look for co-maintainers,
> or a new maintainer? By orphaning, you just became the "thinned" part of
> the herd.
>
Just because you can't
> Second, uploading something to AUR4 then immediately orphaning it is
> stupid. Why not just hold onto it for a while and look for co-maintainers,
> or a new maintainer? By orphaning, you just became the "thinned" part of
> the herd.
Well, if it's orphaned another potential maintainer who comes a
On 11 Aug 2015, at 3:48 pm +0200, Johannes Dewender wrote:
> [snip]
> I uploaded both to AUR3 and also to AUR4.
> I maintain the free branch, because I think this is the better variant.
> Having the original on AUR would be good, so I also updloaded these, but
> I personally don't want to maintai
Am 11.08.2015 um 14:08 schrieb Simon Hanna:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 07:36:53AM +, Justin Dray wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 17:09 Antonio Rojas wrote:
>>> Rob McCathie
>>> Wrote in message:
Just a query: Why were packages i added to AUR4, ensured were in good
working order (and m
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Bruno Pagani
wrote:
> Well, the first email states Kyrias did this…
>
> Le 11 août 2015 10:15:42 GMT+02:00, David Phillips
> a écrit :
> >A certain TU went around deleting orphaned stuff… won't name them
> >though ;-)
>
Don't know what the motivation is behind
Well, the first email states Kyrias did this…
Le 11 août 2015 10:15:42 GMT+02:00, David Phillips a
écrit :
>A certain TU went around deleting orphaned stuff… won't name them
>though ;-)
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 07:36:53AM +, Justin Dray wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 17:09 Antonio Rojas wrote:
>
> > Rob McCathie
> > Wrote in message:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Just a query: Why were packages i added to AUR4, ensured were in good
> > > working order (and made an enhancement to one
A certain TU went around deleting orphaned stuff… won't name them though ;-)
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 17:09 Antonio Rojas wrote:
> Rob McCathie
> Wrote in message:
>
> >
> >
> > Just a query: Why were packages i added to AUR4, ensured were in good
> > working order (and made an enhancement to one of the packages compared
> > to the last release on AUR3), know are used by at
Rob McCathie
Wrote in message:
>
>
> Just a query: Why were packages i added to AUR4, ensured were in good
> working order (and made an enhancement to one of the packages compared
> to the last release on AUR3), know are used by at least some users,
> and then orphaned so some other interested
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:30 AM, wrote:
> Kyrias deleted "compiz-gtk-standalone".
>
> You will no longer receive notifications about this package.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:32 AM, wrote:
> Kyrias deleted "compiz-xfce".
>
> You will no longer receive notifications about this package.
Just a q
30 matches
Mail list logo
