Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Hi, A former TU has kindly made me aware that it looks like I disagree with the overall point here, which is that one should not make changes like the ones I made without first discussing it with the rest of the maintainers. I fully agree with this, and has already apologized for doing so, just to make it clear. Best regards, Alexander Rødseth
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Hi Xyne, 2012/10/27 Xyne x...@archlinux.ca: Of course the PKGBUILDs and everything else in the repos belong to Arch, not each individual packager. I didn't mean that it was disrespectful in the sense of encroaching on others' property. I meant that it was disrespectful in the sense that you concluded that most of the other packagers were producing substandard packages and that you needed to help them do it right. Let me quote the Arch Packaging Guidelines [1]: When creating a package description for a package, do not include the package name in a self-referencing way. For example, Nedit is a text editor for X11 could be simplified to A text editor for X11. And the DeveloperWiki:Bash Coding Style page [2]: Use single quotes if a string does not contain parseable content. These are not policies and guidelines that have originated from my own head, from belief in my own superiority nor out of any disrespect. If you think otherwise, you're wrong. I wanted to implement lots of small changes, that people otherwise won't bother with, that are in compliance with the current guidelines. I am having a hard time believing you find this to be disrespectful. I could clarify further but this is already too far off topic and likely to create tension. No please, do clarify further, if there is anything you haven't made clear yet. I found your implication that my intentions may not have been good troubling... Good intentions or not is an idiomatic expression. It conveys that I thought your intentions were good, but that it doesn't change what follows. Compare believe it or not [1]. It was satire, since I believe you're making a big deal out of a miniscule issue. - Alexander [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Bash_Coding_Style
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 29/10/12 12:32, Alexander Rødseth wrote: Hi Xyne, Hi Xyne, Alexander, Evangelos and the rest of the gang. 2012/10/27 Xyne x...@archlinux.ca: Of course the PKGBUILDs and everything else in the repos belong to Arch, not each individual packager. I didn't mean that it was disrespectful in the sense of encroaching on others' property. I meant that it was disrespectful in the sense that you concluded that most of the other packagers were producing substandard packages and that you needed to help them do it right. Let me quote the Arch Packaging Guidelines [1]: When creating a package description for a package, do not include the package name in a self-referencing way. For example, Nedit is a text editor for X11 could be simplified to A text editor for X11. And the DeveloperWiki:Bash Coding Style page [2]: Use single quotes if a string does not contain parseable content. These are not policies and guidelines that have originated from my own head, from belief in my own superiority nor out of any disrespect. If you think otherwise, you're wrong. I wanted to implement lots of small changes, that people otherwise won't bother with, that are in compliance with the current guidelines. I am having a hard time believing you find this to be disrespectful. snip I understand the angry of the effect of this, but I think Alexander's mistake was not to tell us his idea and apply it by his own (as many other people said). Enough discussion about this, he do had good intentions, he do apologize with us, so let's move on. I support the idea of do a planning examining the results of Alexander's tool in order to clean a little bit some of our packages, but with planning and awareness about what will be done. Please let's advance with this. Cheers. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQjqPnAAoJEEKh2xXsEzutpWQH/it6xd/9x6DIcOp402buJM6x oJY5mFSwO1GzYNRq2UoiZAMDude9KQtAcpuTq+/dvUPRbB1YI8Qet7xwHMqbzgwb RfV5AQfltvz8sidXS5Ps6RW6YZrP7XSJ7Wsm+4fV5t3xryeFUXonepobrijMpRqK idvSNDGvbPn/o0SiqZTOpz8JJTvNA6i47E88j9hxU5gIZpdCcgJVPxCUL/L9ZrMC YkhJx7Uwmdq/4VJBKV9PqImnK6pVwRulxyCemMz+fsq2lW3dN85YPh1Zt6MVZrmU TUS8ew3/o92HBWI9TJeq1l+dgOyP+MXow383aWNXJR5b5zPZbChSagJlMMwzYIk= =t3SU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Alexander Rødseth wrote: I disagree with you here, for two reasons. Firstly, I view the package ownership as a collective ownership, where the package maintainers of Arch Linux maintain all the packages together. At least for [community]. This is reflected on how we help each other out on TODO-lists, with bugs and with updates on packages. I certainly wouldn't mind if someone fixed a problem with one of the PKGBUILDs I maintain, or ran a script (that could easily be rolled back) that made a series of minor positive changes (like converting every PKGBUILD in [community] to UTF-8). Secondly, the changes were made on so many packages, that it's hard to believe anyone would take it personally or view the change as disrespectful. Of course, if people cling to their packages, believe every man is an island and put much pride in their package descriptions, I can understand why it can be perceived as disrespectful, but I still insist that it is not. I think my meaning was misunderstood. Of course the PKGBUILDs and everything else in the repos belong to Arch, not each individual packager. I didn't mean that it was disrespectful in the sense of encroaching on others' property. I meant that it was disrespectful in the sense that you concluded that most of the other packagers were producing substandard packages and that you needed to help them do it right. I could clarify further but this is already too far off topic and likely to create tension. Good intentions or not, I find the lack of consideration troubling. I found your implication that my intentions may not have been good troubling... Good intentions or not is an idiomatic expression. It conveys that I thought your intentions were good, but that it doesn't change what follows. Compare believe it or not [1]. Concluding, I don't think it was a big issue but it's bigger than you think, I know it was meant well, and no animals were harmed in the making of this change, so everything's fine. Just discuss it first next time. ;) [1] http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/believe+it+or+not
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
On 25/10/12 10:07, Evangelos Foutras wrote: - Double quotes were changed to single quotes even though /usr/share/pacman/PKGBUILD.proto uses single quotes Correction: I meant to say that /usr/share/pacman/PKGBUILD.proto uses *double* quotes for the pkgdesc field.
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:07:09 +0300 Evangelos Foutras evange...@foutrelis.com wrote: I noticed that all of my community packages were modified by r78782 [1] (Full pkgdesc cleanup for 2339 packages). This was not discussed beforehand as it should. I would have been against it and we probably would have saved ourselves lots of unneeded noise in the repository. Besides the obtrusiveness of this commit, there were a couple more issues: - Indentation of pkgdesc inside package_*() functions was lost - Double quotes were changed to single quotes even though /usr/share/pacman/PKGBUILD.proto uses single quotes Whether or not it is a good idea to automatically try and correct slightly wrong package descriptions (in my opinion it's not worth it), the lack of communication is unacceptable. I went ahead and reversed the changes moments ago so the whole thing is now a noop. Please let's not do this again. :) [1] https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/commit/?id=9f040fd30a39c05d750d670ca40fc80f6c648b71 As all of my packages were also part of this commit, it'd really be nice to be told about the reason for this. Because it were not just the pure quotes but also the content of the description. https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/diff/john/trunk/PKGBUILD?id=9f040fd30a39c05d750d670ca40fc80f6c648b71 It is not wanted for packages to contain the package name in the description and this is right for almost every package, yet in my opinion the package john is one of the few exceptions. The program sources and binaries are a plain john, yet the project itself is best known as John The Ripper. So most people will probably search for this and not just john when they need this tool. If this shall not be the case I don't have a problem with removing the project name from the description but stripping the name with a small script is not right. Evangelos, thank you for reversing this commit and bring attention to it. -- Jabber: atsut...@freethoughts.de Blog: http://atsutane.freethoughts.de/ Key: 295AFBF4 FP: 39F8 80E5 0E49 A4D1 1341 E8F9 39E4 F17F 295A FBF4 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
[2012-10-25 10:07:09 +0300] Evangelos Foutras: I noticed that all of my community packages were modified by r78782 [1] (Full pkgdesc cleanup for 2339 packages). Being a fierce proponent of single quotes myself, your message gave me the impression that those changes were sane and that you were just pissed by the lack of communication. Now that I noticed one of my packages was affected too: - I am outraged by the lack of communication! :D - I am appalled by how moronic the script was. On liboping's PKGBUILD: -pkgdesc='C library to generate ICMP echo requests, better known as ping packets' +pkgdesc='Ping packets' I mean, seriously... -- Gaetan
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org wrote: [2012-10-25 10:07:09 +0300] Evangelos Foutras: I noticed that all of my community packages were modified by r78782 [1] (Full pkgdesc cleanup for 2339 packages). Being a fierce proponent of single quotes myself, your message gave me the impression that those changes were sane and that you were just pissed by the lack of communication. Now that I noticed one of my packages was affected too: - I am outraged by the lack of communication! :D - I am appalled by how moronic the script was. On liboping's PKGBUILD: -pkgdesc='C library to generate ICMP echo requests, better known as ping packets' +pkgdesc='Ping packets' Add an letter. -pkgdesc='Daemon for delivering ACPI power management events with netlink support' +pkgdesc='A daemon for delivering ACPI power management events with netlink support' Add a dot (but not for others) -pkgdesc='Minimalistic user-space library oriented to Netlink developers' +pkgdesc='Minimalistic user-space library oriented to Netlink developers.' Removing first capital letter -pkgdesc='Top-like interface to netfilter connection-tracking table' +pkgdesc='top-like interface to netfilter connection-tracking table' I believe this start by a good will but updates are not obvious. A mail asking to maintainers to review your update patch have dragged all this. Cheers, -- Sébastien Seblu Luttringer https://www.seblu.net GPG: 0x2072D77A
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Hello, First of all, sorry for not communicating this before making the changes. I honestly thought this would be considered to be such a minor change and such a minor issue (even though it affects many packages), that it would not be worth communicating first. If I had been aware of previous cases where similar changes were made (by a script), and the changes were communicated first, I would have attempted to follow the example of those. Secondly, this change did not cause any technical problems. There was one case where the description was broken (0.0004% of all affected packages), thanks Gaetan Bisson for pointing it out. As far as I know, that was the exception to the rule (and the package would still build), but any bug is inexcusable, of course. When it comes to double vs single quoting, can we change PKGBUILD.proto to use single quotes? The character '$' only occurs in the package description in 3 of the community packages, and those 3 can still use double quotes. All that aside, would it be okay for you all if I removed An ..., A ... and Application is ... from the start of all package descriptions (and making the first letter an uppercase letter)? This adds no information to the description and (IMO) looks ugly. Just this change, no changes to indentation, trailing periods or quoting? Thanks for your understanding. May any distressed individuals find it in their hearts to let go of the outrage and search innner peace and ponies. -- Sincerely, Alexander Rødseth Arch Linux Trusted User (xyproto on IRC, trontonic on AUR)
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Le 2012-10-25 07:39, Alexander Rødseth a écrit : All that aside, would it be okay for you all if I removed An ..., A ... and Application is ... from the start of all package descriptions (and making the first letter an uppercase letter)? This adds no information to the description and (IMO) looks ugly. Just this change, no changes to indentation, trailing periods or quoting? My intention is not to slash you as I think you had good intention and wanted to be helpful. However, I feel like this is similar to whithe space fixing and that this is a waist of time. I appreciate that you mention your opinion about package description, but I would let the final choice to modify a package or not to the maintainer. Cheers, Stéphane
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Alexander Rødseth rods...@gmail.com wrote:
When it comes to double vs single quoting, can we change
PKGBUILD.proto to use single quotes? The character '$' only occurs in
the package description in 3 of the community packages, and those 3
can still use double quotes.
The main repos have 2815 occurrences using double quotes, 409 using
single quotes. So sounds like we should unify on using double quotes.
I think you also missed this case, given that the single quote ' is
used quite regularly in the English language:
dmcgee@galway ~/projects/arch-repos
$ LANG=C grep pkgdesc=\.*' */trunk/PKGBUILD
achessclock/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Angus' Chess Clock
bootchart/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A 'startup' graphing tool
cdargs/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A replacement for 'cd' that includes
bookmarks/browsing for faster navigation
clawsker/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=An applet to edit Claws Mail's hidden
preferences.
claws-mail-themes/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Claws Mail's themes
cvsps/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Generating 'patchset' information from a
CVS repository
djvulibre/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Suite to create, manipulate and view
DjVu ('déjà vu') documents
emovix/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Create Movix-CD's (also emovix plugin for k3b)
foomatic-db-hpijs/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Foomatic is a system for
using free software printer drivers with common spoolers on Unix -
Foomatic data for the HP's HPIJS printer drivers
foomatic/trunk/PKGBUILD: pkgdesc=Foomatic - Filter scripts used by
the printer spoolers to convert the incoming PostScript data into the
printer's native format.
foomatic/trunk/PKGBUILD: pkgdesc=Foomatic - Foomatic's database
engine generates PPD files from the data in Foomatic's XML database.
It also contains scripts to directly generate print queues and handle
jobs.
fprint_demo/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Simple GTK+ application to
demonstrate and test libfprint's capabilities
gimp-dbp/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=David's batch processor for the GIMP
go-openoffice/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=OpenOffice.org - go-oo.org
enhanced version of SUN's office suite
grml-zsh-config/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=grml's zsh setup
gtklife/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=GtkLife is a fast, featureful,
open-source Conway's Life program for *nix
gtkpod/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A platform independent GUI for Apple's
iPod using GTK3
hmmer/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Profile hidden Markov models (profile
HMMs) can be used to do sensitive database searching using statistical
descriptions of a sequence family's consensus
host/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Lightweight alternative to bind's host.
iwlwifi-1000-ucode/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Intel wireless firmware for
Intel's WiFi Link 1000BGN wireless devices
iwlwifi-5000-ucode/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Intel wireless firmware for
Intel's 5100BG, 5100ABG, 5100AGN, 5300AGN and 5350AGN wireless
devices
iwlwifi-6000-ucode/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Intel wireless firmware for
Intel's 6000 Series wireless devices
jade/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=James Clark's DSSSL Engine
jdk/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Sun's Java Development Kit
jre/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Sun's java runtime environment
kernel26mm/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=The Linux Kernel and modules,
Andrew Morton's -mm tree
kiosktool/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A PointClick tool for system
administrators to enable KDE's KIOSK features or otherwise
preconfigure KDE for groups of users
kobodeluxe/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=An enhanced version of Akira
Higuchi's game XKobo, an addictive space shoot'em up
ladspa/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Linux Audio Developer's Simple Plugin
API (LADSPA)
lesstif/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=LGPL'd re-implementation of Motif
libdjvu/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Library to process DjVu ('déjà vu') documents
libidl2/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A front-end for CORBA 2.2 IDL and
Netscape's XPIDL
libifp/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=General-purpose library-driver for
iRiver's iFP portable audio players
libmsn/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A reusable, open-source, fully
documented library for connecting to Microsoft's MSN
libnice/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=An implementation of the IETF's draft
ICE (for p2p UDP data streams)
libplist/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A library to handle Apple Property
List format whereas it's binary or XML
libwmf/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A library for reading vector images in
Microsoft's native Windows Metafile Format (WMF)
libxfixes/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=X11 miscellaneous 'fixes' extension library
libytnef/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Yerase's TNEF Stream Reader library
(decode winmail.dat)
libzrtpcpp/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A C++ implementation of Phil
Zimmermann's ZRTP specification
libzvt/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Zed's virtual terminal library
mcpp/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Matsui's CPP implementation precisely
conformed to standards
most/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A terminal pager similar to 'more' and 'less'
nant/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=A free .NET build tool, like make but
without make's problems
nxclient/trunk/PKGBUILD:pkgdesc=Nomachine's closed source client for
NX servers
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Hi Dan, 2012/10/25 Dan McGee dpmc...@gmail.com: I think you also missed this case, given that the single quote ' is used quite regularly in the English language: You're jumping to conclusions here. If you check the changes I made, you will see that single quotes within double quotes were checked for: https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/diff/checkinstall/trunk/PKGBUILD?id=9f040fd30a39c05d750d670ca40fc80f6c648b71 -- Cordially, Alexander Rødseth Arch Linux Trusted User (xyproto on IRC, trontonic on AUR)
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Alexander Rødseth wrote: All that aside, would it be okay for you all if I removed An ..., A ... and Application is ... from the start of all package descriptions (and making the first letter an uppercase letter)? This adds no information to the description and (IMO) looks ugly. Just this change, no changes to indentation, trailing periods or quoting? Thanks for your understanding. May any distressed individuals find it in their hearts to let go of the outrage and search innner peace and ponies. The lack of communication really is the key issue here. It is disrespectful to other packagers to improve their packages this way. It is also dangerous to have one dev or TU who thinks he knows best and who will push sweeping changes without so much as a discussion about his intentions. The other aspect is that this is stylistic. I have long argued that having PKGBUILDs written in Bash is a mistake and that something uniform that is perfectly and safely parsable would be much more preferable. That is, however, not the current state of affairs. PKGBUILDs are Bash and syntactically the only criterion is that they be valid Bash (in both the syntactic and the functional sense). I agree that the proper use of quoting to handle all paths, overall stylish consistency, etc., should be encouraged. Single quotes make sense if nothing in the string requires interpolation, but there is no reason to force it on people as it makes no different for the functionality or legibility of the PKGBUILD, except in cases where the difference is desired behavior. Let the packager decide. For the package descriptions, that should be left up to the packager as well. The description has no programmatic purpose. Its sole purpose is to provide users with information. Sometimes a few words is enough, sometimes a full sentence makes sense. The important thing is the information that it conveys to the users, not the arbitrary aesthetic value that you attribute to it when printed out alongside others in a terminal. So, start a discussion about packaging guidelines. Use a script to find PKGBUILDs that you would like to change and notify the maintainer. Don't mass-update PKGBUILDs without telling anyone about it and then be surprised that you upset some people. Good intentions or not, I find the lack of consideration troubling. Do not take the length of my reply to indicate that I am upset or angry. I simply wanted to explain my own views on this as you do not seem to understand why others consider this a bigger issue than you do. Regards, Xyne
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Hello Xyne, 2012/10/25 Xyne x...@archlinux.ca: The lack of communication really is the key issue here. It is disrespectful to other packagers to improve their packages this way. I disagree with you here, for two reasons. Firstly, I view the package ownership as a collective ownership, where the package maintainers of Arch Linux maintain all the packages together. At least for [community]. This is reflected on how we help each other out on TODO-lists, with bugs and with updates on packages. I certainly wouldn't mind if someone fixed a problem with one of the PKGBUILDs I maintain, or ran a script (that could easily be rolled back) that made a series of minor positive changes (like converting every PKGBUILD in [community] to UTF-8). Secondly, the changes were made on so many packages, that it's hard to believe anyone would take it personally or view the change as disrespectful. Of course, if people cling to their packages, believe every man is an island and put much pride in their package descriptions, I can understand why it can be perceived as disrespectful, but I still insist that it is not. It is also dangerous to have one dev or TU who thinks he knows best and who will push sweeping changes without so much as a discussion about his intentions. This is two different things. I don't think I know best, but I think I had a good idea, and I knew the changes were both harmless and easy to revert. However, I agree that I should have communicated my intentions first. For this, I have already apologized. But, I disagree that it's a big deal, and I protest the use of a word like dangerous in this context. I won't comment on the stylistic aspects of PKGBUILDs you mention. Good intentions or not, I find the lack of consideration troubling. I found your implication that my intentions may not have been good troubling... -- Best regards, Alexander Rødseth Arch Linux Trusted User (xyproto on IRC, trontonic on AUR)
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
On 26 October 2012 01:23, Xyne x...@archlinux.ca wrote: Alexander Rødseth wrote: All that aside, would it be okay for you all if I removed An ..., A ... and Application is ... from the start of all package descriptions (and making the first letter an uppercase letter)? This adds no information to the description and (IMO) looks ugly. Just this change, no changes to indentation, trailing periods or quoting? Thanks for your understanding. May any distressed individuals find it in their hearts to let go of the outrage and search innner peace and ponies. The lack of communication really is the key issue here. It is disrespectful to other packagers to improve their packages this way. It is also dangerous to have one dev or TU who thinks he knows best and who will push sweeping changes without so much as a discussion about his intentions. The other aspect is that this is stylistic. I have long argued that having PKGBUILDs written in Bash is a mistake and that something uniform that is perfectly and safely parsable would be much more preferable. That is, however, not the current state of affairs. PKGBUILDs are Bash and syntactically the only criterion is that they be valid Bash (in both the syntactic and the functional sense). I agree that the proper use of quoting to handle all paths, overall stylish consistency, etc., should be encouraged. Single quotes make sense if nothing in the string requires interpolation, but there is no reason to force it on people as it makes no different for the functionality or legibility of the PKGBUILD, except in cases where the difference is desired behavior. Let the packager decide. For the package descriptions, that should be left up to the packager as well. The description has no programmatic purpose. Its sole purpose is to provide users with information. Sometimes a few words is enough, sometimes a full sentence makes sense. The important thing is the information that it conveys to the users, not the arbitrary aesthetic value that you attribute to it when printed out alongside others in a terminal. So, start a discussion about packaging guidelines. Use a script to find PKGBUILDs that you would like to change and notify the maintainer. Don't mass-update PKGBUILDs without telling anyone about it and then be surprised that you upset some people. Good intentions or not, I find the lack of consideration troubling. Do not take the length of my reply to indicate that I am upset or angry. I simply wanted to explain my own views on this as you do not seem to understand why others consider this a bigger issue than you do. Regards, Xyne I think Xyne touched on this a little bit but the only issue I see here is really just an invasion of stylistic choices in the absence of a proper style guideline (which has also been discussed a number of times without results). Whenever editing someone else's PKGBUILD I always take care to not mess with the cosmetic stuff. Language (desc), I may try to make better (not really something a script should be changing in the first place), but not coding style (I leave indents, bracing and quoting variables alone). Not directed particularly at Alexander or anyone (his intentions were definitely pure), just holler next time you see a chance for a mass edit of minor things. This was just a mistake, so don't be discouraged :) -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
I fully agree with Rashif on this. Thank you. - Alexander
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
[2012-10-25 20:58:48 +0200] Alexander Rødseth: Of course, if people cling to their packages, believe every man is an island and put much pride in their package descriptions, I can understand why it can be perceived as disrespectful Adding insult to injury - way to go my friend! Guess where the only pride I can see comes from... -- Gaetan
Re: [arch-dev-public] Unannounced mass edit of community PKGBUILDs
Hi, Den 25. okt. 2012 23:41 skrev Gaetan Bisson bis...@archlinux.org følgende: Adding insult to injury - way to go my friend! Way to ignore all my points. Guess where the only pride I can see comes from... Pride is a large topic. I think it's good to be proud of the work you do and whatever good intentions you have. However, I don't think it's constructive to be overly protective of the revision history of PKGBUILD files you maintain. Please do tell where the only pride you can see comes from. - Alexander
