On 18 July 2013 23:24, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The two packages that are out of date has not been updated for three years.
>
> My plan is to orphan all his packages if nobody thinks that's a
> horribly bad idea.
>
> I'm also interested in comments about what should be done for similar
>
Could yall please remove get-pid, I'm no longer actively developing
it--and it really isn't required anyway since `pidof' works just fine.
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/getpid/
Thank you
--
Alexej Magura
Give a little more for a little less today. :)
Hi
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Agustin Ferrario
wrote:
> On 07/18/2013 11:39 PM, Anatol Pomozov wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Is there any style checker tool for PKGBUILD files? Something similar
>> to lint? If yes then it worth checking for style violations as well,
>> e.g. "PKGBUILD does not have pac
On 07/18/2013 08:39 PM, Anatol Pomozov wrote:
Hi
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Phillip Smith wrote:
Is there any style checker tool for PKGBUILD files? Something similar
to lint? If yes then it worth checking for style violations as well,
e.g. "PKGBUILD does not have package()" function. So
On 07/18/2013 11:39 PM, Anatol Pomozov wrote:
> Hi
>
> Is there any style checker tool for PKGBUILD files? Something similar
> to lint? If yes then it worth checking for style violations as well,
> e.g. "PKGBUILD does not have package()" function. So bot can send a
> note to owner and mark the pack
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:39 AM, Anatol Pomozov
wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Phillip Smith wrote:
>> On 19 July 2013 10:28, John D Jones III wrote:
>>> I like this... though I think 6 months would be better than 3 on the
>>> initial Orphaning. There should for sure be a fina
Hi
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Phillip Smith wrote:
> On 19 July 2013 10:28, John D Jones III wrote:
>> I like this... though I think 6 months would be better than 3 on the initial
>> Orphaning. There should for sure be a final "DUDE!!! Fix your crap" Warning
>> email sent to the maintain
On Thursday, July 18, 2013 17:37:49 Fortunato Ventre wrote:
> Hi,
> I've moved my project's code from launchpad to github, and I have created a
> new -git package for it on aur [1].
> Please merge the old -bzr package [2] with it.
>
> Thank you!
>
> [1] - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/samsun
On Thursday, July 18, 2013 21:58:05 Enrico Lovisotto wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've noticed that two packages provides the same software. They are
> - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/writer2epub/
> - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libreoffice-extension-writer2epub/
>
> I think the latter is bett
On Thursday, July 18, 2013 22:32:22 Willem wrote:
> Please remove python-elixir or, preferably, merge comments and votes
> into python2-elixir.
Merged.
Please include links to packages next time, thanks!
Regards,
Felix Yan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On 19 July 2013 11:02, Phillip Smith wrote:
> A daily process to automatically disown abandoned packages would be
> great, but it needs to account for the last modified date too:
I realized just as I hit send that a package can never be flagged out
of date longer than the last updated date. Derp.
On 19 July 2013 10:28, John D Jones III wrote:
> I like this... though I think 6 months would be better than 3 on the initial
> Orphaning. There should for sure be a final "DUDE!!! Fix your crap" Warning
> email sent to the maintainer, like above, perhaps a 7 day warning?
A daily process to aut
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 07:26:33PM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Geoffrey van Wyk
> wrote:
> > On Thursday 18 July 2013 14:56:40 Anatol Pomozov wrote:
> >
> >> "if a package is marked out-of-date
> >> for more than 3 months then it disowns automatically"
> >
> > Loo
On 07/18/2013 04:36 PM, Geoffrey van Wyk wrote:
On Thursday 18 July 2013 19:26:33 Daniel Micay wrote:
And a last warning 5 days before orphanage.
I like this... though I think 6 months would be better than 3 on the
initial Orphaning. There should for sure be a final "DUDE!!! Fix your
crap"
On Thursday 18 July 2013 19:26:33 Daniel Micay wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Geoffrey van Wyk
>
> wrote:
> > On Thursday 18 July 2013 14:56:40 Anatol Pomozov wrote:
> >> "if a package is marked out-of-date
> >> for more than 3 months then it disowns automatically"
> >
> > Looks like
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Daniel Micay wrote:
> As long as it fires off a warning email or two (at 1 month
> out-of-date, and again at 2), I don't see any problems with doing
> that.
This.
We have a policy of "e-mail the maintainer and wait 2 weeks for
response" so disowning a package w/o
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Geoffrey van Wyk
wrote:
> On Thursday 18 July 2013 14:56:40 Anatol Pomozov wrote:
>
>> "if a package is marked out-of-date
>> for more than 3 months then it disowns automatically"
>
> Looks like a good policy.
As long as it fires off a warning email or two (at 1 m
On Thursday 18 July 2013 14:56:40 Anatol Pomozov wrote:
> "if a package is marked out-of-date
> for more than 3 months then it disowns automatically"
Looks like a good policy.
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
> Thank you for the comments, appreciate it!
>
> About causing panic when orphaning: the package will continue to be
> available and work even if it's orphaned, but now there is a chance
> that someone will pick up the thread where the pre
On 19 July 2013 05:24, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
> I'm also interested in comments about what should be done for similar
> situations in the future. I assume most users would be happy just to
> see the pacakges being updated instead of hoarded and would think it
> was fine if TUs just orphan them a
Hi,
2013/7/17 Oon-Ee Ng :
> Fair enough but I would not call Ralf a first-timer perhaps to the
> AUR list, but certainly not to Arch.
Good point, I only had this list in mind.
--
Sincerely,
Alexander Rødseth
xyproto / TU
Thank you for the comments, appreciate it!
About causing panic when orphaning: the package will continue to be
available and work even if it's orphaned, but now there is a chance
that someone will pick up the thread where the previous maintainer
left of and improve and update the PKGBUILD. If some
Hi
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Some of these packages are out of date and some have better PKGBUILDs
> in the comments:
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?K=phi&SeB=m
>
> Last activity from the user was over two years ago: 2011-03-17 (the
> brother-hl2
On 07/18/2013 03:41 PM, Karol Blazewicz wrote:
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
There are quite a few orphaned packages nobody is maintaining or
updating even though they have updated PKGBUILDs posted in the
comments.
Users can always ask for a package to be orphaned.
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Alexander Rødseth wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Some of these packages are out of date and some have better PKGBUILDs
> in the comments:
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?K=phi&SeB=m
>
> Last activity from the user was over two years ago: 2011-03-17 (the
> brother-hl2030
Hi,
Some of these packages are out of date and some have better PKGBUILDs
in the comments:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?K=phi&SeB=m
Last activity from the user was over two years ago: 2011-03-17 (the
brother-hl2030 package)
The two packages that are out of date has not been updated for t
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Rafael Ferreira
wrote:
> Em 17/07/2013 12:34, Jonathan Arnold escreveu:
>
> Speaking of removing packages, is there a tool that would tell me if a
>> package I have installed has been removed? As someone who installs far
>> too many packages, I will end up with a
Please remove python-elixir or, preferably, merge comments and votes
into python2-elixir.
Jakub Klinkovský wrote:
Do we really need legacy packages of 3 years old software, which were only
submitted and never updated?
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qemu-legacy/
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qemu-legacy-light/
On similar note:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qemu-kvm-opens
Hello,
I've noticed that two packages provides the same software. They are
- https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/writer2epub/
- https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/libreoffice-extension-writer2epub/
I think the latter is better built, because of group assignation, so I will
eliminate the former.
T
Hi,
I've moved my project's code from launchpad to github, and I have created a
new -git package for it on aur [1].
Please merge the old -bzr package [2] with it.
Thank you!
[1] - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/samsung-tools-git/
[2] - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/samsung-tools-bzr/
Do we really need legacy packages of 3 years old software, which were only
submitted and never updated?
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qemu-legacy/
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qemu-legacy-light/
On similar note:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/qemu-kvm-opensuse/
pgpDOamNEAG5v.pgp
D
On 07/17/2013 11:52 PM, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
I have been using Arch Linux for last ~5 years but that does not really
matter as I have never spent any considerable time maintaining packages.
Do you use Arch as your main computer OS? On servers ? On testing vm ?
All of those. main one on
On 07/17/2013 08:02 PM, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
It's nice to see someone apply who is willing to maitain the D
toolchain. But are you willing to maintain non-related D packages in
[community] which are currently orphan or is there a certain category of
packages you like to maintain?
I have no
On Thursday, July 18, 2013 10:32:15 Bastien Dejean wrote:
> Please remove the following package:
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sortsmill-fontforge
>
> It was renamed to *sortsmill-tools*.
>
> Greetings,
Merged, thanks.
Regards,
Felix Yan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitall
Please remove the following package:
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sortsmill-fontforge
It was renamed to *sortsmill-tools*.
Greetings,
--
b.d
(| |)
^ ^
=== 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
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 14 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days
37 matches
Mail list logo
