This change sounds sensible to me. I would be more than happy to turn compiz-core-bzr back into compiz-bzr.
Regarding compiz.org, that has been dead for a long time and I wouldn't consider it an authority on Compiz information. For instance: on the front page of wiki.compiz.org it states that 0.8.8 is the latest 0.8 release and 0.9.8 is the latest 0.9 release when it is actually 0.8.9 and 0.9.11 respectively. I wouldn't regard the 0.9.x series is not a fork. It's a development branch which should theoretically be released as Compiz 0.10 or Compiz 1.0 in the same way that GNOME 3.13 is a development branch that will be released as 3.14 in the future. Regarding the renaming of the 0.8 packages. Perhaps they could be called compiz0.8 instead of compiz-legacy. This sometimes happens in the official repos. For instance: there's wxgtk (which is at version 3) and wxgtk2.8. Just a thought. Regards On 25 July 2014 10:23, Rob McCathie <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello AUR general & Compiz package maintainers. > >> > >> There was some discussion about Compiz packages a little while ago, i > >> don't think that much came of it. I'd like to re-open the discussion. > >> > >> My opinions/suggestions: > >> > >> Calling the 0.8 series "compiz" and the 0.9 series "compiz-devel" is > >> no longer correct, it hasn't been for quite some time. > >> > >> All information on this page: > >> http://www.compiz.org/ > >> is completely wrong and out of date, like 5 years out of date, and > >> should not be used as a reference for anything. > >> Tracking of the state of Compiz should be done from here: > >> https://launchpad.net/compiz > >> > >> Development of the 0.8 series is as close to being dead as it could > >> be. Unless you count 2 tiny commits 5 months ago, nothing has been > >> done in 16 months, and even that 16 month old commit was a minor > >> change just to get it working with KDE 4.10, with the commit prior to > >> that being an additional 5 months back. > >> http://cgit.compiz.org/compiz/core/log/?h=compiz-0.8 > >> > >> My suggestion is pretty simple, "compiz" becomes the 0.9 series, the > >> 0.8 series becomes "compiz-legacy". > >> Any 0.9 series packages that have "core" in their name should have it > >> removed, since the concept of Compiz being split up has been dropped > >> since the 0.9 series. The 0.9 series doesn't have a "core" component, > >> it's just "compiz". > >> > >> Some examples: > >> > >> martadinata666's "compiz-core" package would become "compiz-legacy-core" > >> > >> dev_rs0's "compiz-core-devel" package would become simply "compiz" > >> > >> Chazza's "compiz-core-bzr" package would become "compiz-bzr" > >> > >> flexiondotorg's "compiz-core-mate" package would become > >> "compiz-legacy-core-mate" > >> > >> My "compiz-gtk-standalone" package would become > "compiz-legacy-gtk-standalone" > >> > >> All the "compiz-fusion-plugins-*" packages would become > >> "compiz-legacy-fusion-plugins-*" > >> > >> ...and so on. > >> > >> What are everyone's thoughts? > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, > >> Rob McCathie > > > >If that's true, why haven't the developers updated the site to reflect > >that? > > I think it's fairly obvious that no one is actually maintaining that site. > > >The lead developer seems to consider the project dead, and the > >site reflects that view. Canonical is doing temporary maintenance of > >their fork until they move to Mir. > > I wouldn't call the 0.9 series "Canonical's fork". Canonical hired > lead Compiz developer, Sam Spilsbury, to continue work on Compiz. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiz#Compiz_0.9_series > I don't see how the current launchpad hosted Compiz could be > considered anything other than the true successor. > > Also, to ensure another common misconception doesn't crop up - The > Compiz 0.9 gets further patched beyond what is on launchpad.net/compiz > by Canonical for Unity. The code you get if you source directly from > launchpad.net/compiz is not Unity or Ubuntu specific. I can say this > with much confidence, since i've been using it for months now combined > with Xfce (as a xfwm4 replacement) on Arch and Manjaro systems. > > -- > Regards, > Rob McCathie >
