Re: [aur-general] Copy package from AUR archive

[Eli Schwartz via aur-general]

On 09/30/2016 03:22 PM, Yassine Imounachen via aur-general wrote:
> OK what I did really mean is how to update it

Let's try that again.

> the rules for submitting a deleted AUR3 package are of course the 
> same rules as for submitting a brand-new package.

The old, AUR3 version will give you a good idea of how it was done in
the past, and you may wish to stick with that, or you may disagree and
wish to do something completely different, or upstream might have
changed something, etc. etc. etc

But that has absolutely nothing to do with "submitting a deleted AUR3
package", it is the same as when you take over an orphaned package, or
notice your own package isn't building properly anymore.

-- 
Eli Schwartz

Re: [aur-general] Copy package from AUR archive

[Martin Kühne via aur-general]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Yassine Imounachen via aur-general
 wrote:
> OK what I did really mean is how to update it
>

That is a very unspecific question and in practice the answer may be
two little changes (version numbers) or a total rewrite of the build
and packaging functions because literally all the things changed - or
the former way it was done was terrible beyond belief.
If you're looking for the current version, see the url= line in the
pkgbuild and open that link in your browser.
All the other things you can learn from [0]. Please ask away when you
need further help.

cheers!
mar77i

[0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Build_System

Re: [aur-general] Copy package from AUR archive

[Yassine Imounachen via aur-general]

OK what I did really mean is how to update it

On 30 Sep 2016 6:43 pm, "Yassine Imounachen"  wrote:

> Hello,
> What are good practices of re-submitting deleted AUR3 packages? Namely
> 'strongswan-git'.
>

Re: [aur-general] Copy package from AUR archive

[Eli Schwartz via aur-general]

On 09/30/2016 01:43 PM, Yassine Imounachen via aur-general wrote:
> Hello,
> What are good practices of re-submitting deleted AUR3 packages? Namely
> 'strongswan-git'.
> 

There are no official good practices, but IMPHO, all packages migrated
from the AUR3 (whether deleted or not) *should* have had their history
migrated from the aur-mirror archive (assuming a more accurate history
didn't exist in the maintainer's control).

To that end, I wrote a quick script for importing an AUR3 package, you
can see it in my pkgbuilds repo: https://github.com/eli-schwartz/pkgbuilds

It isn't very polished, but it is better than nothing.

...

Other than my subjective opinion about AUR3 history, the rules for
submitting a deleted AUR3 package are of course the same rules as for
submitting a brand-new package

-- 
Eli Schwartz

Re: [aur-general] Copy package from AUR archive

[Noel Kuntze]

On 30.09.2016 19:43, Yassine Imounachen via aur-general wrote:
> Hello,
> What are good practices of re-submitting deleted AUR3 packages? Namely
> 'strongswan-git'.
> 

Hello Yassine,

For strongSwan, a git package (even though there existed one once) does
not make sense, because the git master branch is relatively unstable.
If you actually want an up to date strongSwan package that is usable,
you need to curate the commits.

Just follow the best practices that are outlined on the wiki[1].

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_packaging_standards

-- 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Kind Regards,
Noel Kuntze

GPG Key ID: 0x63EC6658
Fingerprint: 23CA BB60 2146 05E7 7278 6592 3839 298F 63EC 6658




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[aur-general] Copy package from AUR archive

[Yassine Imounachen via aur-general]

Hello,
What are good practices of re-submitting deleted AUR3 packages? Namely
'strongswan-git'.

[aur-general] Signoff report for [community-testing]

[Arch Website Notification]

=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/

There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 1 fully signed off package
* 17 packages missing signoffs
* 12 packages older than 14 days

(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)



== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (17 total) ==

* luarocks-2.4.0-1 (any)
0/2 signoffs
* puppet-4.7.0-1 (any)
1/2 signoffs
* bluegriffon-2.1.1-3 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* iscan-2.30.2-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* julius-4.4.2-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* luasec-2:0.6-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* powerdns-recursor-4.0.2-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* prosody-0.10.r7656+.296543556065+-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* vagrant-1.8.6-2 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* vagrant-substrate-554.9772186-1 (i686)
0/1 signoffs
* bluegriffon-2.1.1-3 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* iscan-2.30.2-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* julius-4.4.2-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* powerdns-recursor-4.0.2-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* prosody-0.10.r7656+.296543556065+-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* vagrant-1.8.6-2 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs
* vagrant-substrate-554.9772186-1 (x86_64)
0/2 signoffs


== Completed signoffs (1 total) ==

* luasec-2:0.6-1 (x86_64)


== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (12 total) ==

* iscan-2.30.2-1 (x86_64), since 2016-07-10
* iscan-2.30.2-1 (i686), since 2016-07-10
* luasec-2:0.6-1 (i686), since 2016-07-14
* luasec-2:0.6-1 (x86_64), since 2016-07-14
* powerdns-recursor-4.0.2-1 (i686), since 2016-08-30
* powerdns-recursor-4.0.2-1 (x86_64), since 2016-08-30
* prosody-0.10.r7656+.296543556065+-1 (i686), since 2016-09-05
* prosody-0.10.r7656+.296543556065+-1 (x86_64), since 2016-09-05
* bluegriffon-2.1.1-3 (i686), since 2016-09-10
* bluegriffon-2.1.1-3 (x86_64), since 2016-09-10
* julius-4.4.2-1 (i686), since 2016-09-14
* julius-4.4.2-1 (x86_64), since 2016-09-14


== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==

1. Irishluck83 - 4 signoffs
2. qguv - 1 signoffs