Hi, funpidgin was renamed to carrier, additionally for some time carrier has
been depending on a package not in a official repo or AUR, a working
alternative has been provided in the comments along, with a request from a
user for someone else to take over maintainer status, this happened on the
18
Daenyth Blank wrote:
Everything looks pretty good to me. The only thing I'd recommend is to
use $srcdir and $pkgdir in place of $startdir/src and $startdir/pkg,
as it makes PKGBUILDs easier to read.
i've fixed all my packages that haven't used $srcdir and $pkgdir.
also if you have other
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 02:25:53AM +0200, Loui Chang wrote:
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 08:03:21PM -0400, Daniel J Griffiths wrote:
Daenyth Blank wrote:
In addition to this, the PKGBUILDs he maintained were generally of
pretty low quality, at least from my perspective.
Took the words
Which suggestion?
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 11:22 +0200 schrieb Jaroslav Lichtblau:
snip
And I also didn't see any response to Allan's suggestion adn that
surprised me a bit.
snap
--
Jens Maucher jensmauc...@online.de
Gnupg: 44FF54EA
Fingerprint: 0E54 F345 E7C9 0295 90F8 2B56 CD9A EE71
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 11:32:42AM +0200, Jens Maucher wrote:
Which suggestion?
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 11:22 +0200 schrieb Jaroslav Lichtblau:
snip
And I also didn't see any response to Allan's suggestion adn that
surprised me a bit.
snap
--
Jens Maucher jensmauc...@online.de
Well, one hour ago, i wrote that i fixed my packaes.
Zattoo is no longer maintained by me, i switched completely to 64bit.
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 12:05 +0200 schrieb Jaroslav Lichtblau:
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 11:32:42AM +0200, Jens Maucher wrote:
Which suggestion?
Am Sonntag, den
And here is my offical sponsorship message.
As Allan said, wonder helped a lot on our bug day and on forums. Also,
he have good packaging skils.
So, let the discussion period officially begin. :)
-- Hugo
Mathias Burén schrieb:
Hi,
I just created a package for OneSwarm [1] and uploaded it to the AUR [2].
The package works fine except that it has an auto-update feature, which of
course doesn't work since the user does not have write access to
/opt/OneSwarm. What is the correct way of dealing with
I don't think zatoo should be that much criticized, it looks somewhat clean.
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Jens Maucher jensmauc...@online.de wrote:
Well, one hour ago, i wrote that i fixed my packaes.
Zattoo is no longer maintained by me, i switched completely to 64bit.
Am Sonntag, den
Stefan Husmann wrote:
the voting period for Defcon has ended, and he did not get the majority
of votes. He got four times yes, eleven times no and four abstains.
So, that is democracy, but it would be nice if there would be some
discussion about the reasons for the failure.
I looked at
Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
Thanks for the useful script! But shouldn't this line:
known_files[entry] =3D (repo, package)
be
known_files[entry].append((repo, package))
That is a nice suggestion! Using lists as hash values could make the tool
useful for purposes other than
Ali H. Caliskan wrote:
I don't think zatoo should be that much criticized, it looks somewhat clean.
I am going to be fairly blunt here, but essentially you are wrong
e.g.
# Kerberos libs
ln -s /usr/lib/libcrypto.so libk5crypto.so.3
ln -s /usr/lib/libkrb5.so libkrb5.so.3
ln -s
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 09:19, Chris Brannon cmbran...@cox.net wrote:
When applying, point out the work that *you* have done.
Mention those packages that you contributed, I.E., those
that aren't adopted. If you put some serious effort into an adopted package,
mention that as well.
What have
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 08:19 -0500 schrieb Chris Brannon:
Stefan Husmann wrote:
the voting period for Defcon has ended, and he did not get the majority
of votes. He got four times yes, eleven times no and four abstains.
So, that is democracy, but it would be nice if there would be
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 09:53, Jens Maucher jensmauc...@online.de wrote:
Packages that are not adopted? Well, to find a package that is
interesting is not easy, the more so as in AUR are already a lot of
packages. So i adopt it, because it is important that the orphaned
packages are evolved, i
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Ali H. Caliskan
ali.h.calis...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing, mkdir is not something bad to use, I use it all the time, and
install isn't also not required, since the developers of install command
argue that a package manager should be used instead of install, so
My thoughts...
I'd say that the install thing was considered to be a minor
infraction -- but regardless of whether it's strictly necessary, I
would say that conventions are good to follow.
As someone who's been involved in an organization with a very strict
entrance system based on votes, I have
Well there is a difference between TU and developer, I'm not saying that
it's not required to be good at coding and consequent about organizing a
PGBUILD, what I'm saying is that we should embrace the enthusiasm and
dedication by people who want to contribute and serve the community the best
way
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 12:10:27AM +0200, Biru Ionut wrote:
Hi,
My name is Biru Ionut Mircea and i'm addicted to archlinux. :)
I'm a 23 year old student from Romania, studying at University
Politehnica of Bucharest, Faculty of Automatic Control and Computer,
Computer Science department.
Hello,
I think Jens and me got some thoughts about the reasons now, why the
appliance failed. I would have expected this discussion in the
discussion period, which was quite calm 8I now see that you guys
expected some answers from Jens and me).
But now I think it is time to calm down a bit
forgive me but, I believe there was a reaction going on before the TU
discussion started, due to zattoo, which I strongly believe was the key
element in Jens unfavourable situation. Again, in order to have a
discussion, one should be encouraged, rather than terrified of being
vulnerable. No
Jaroslav Lichtblau schrieb:
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 12:10:27AM +0200, Biru Ionut wrote:
Hi,
My name is Biru Ionut Mircea and i'm addicted to archlinux. :)
I'm a 23 year old student from Romania, studying at University
Politehnica of Bucharest, Faculty of Automatic Control and Computer,
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 18:49 +0200 schrieb Stefan Husmann:
Hello,
I think we some time ago came to the conclusion that the one who
actually takes care of the package _now_ is the Maintainer, and everyone
who formerly maintained the package is a contributor.
A Package Maintainer, in
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 13:03, Jens Maucher jensmauc...@online.de wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 18:49 +0200 schrieb Stefan Husmann:
Hello,
I think we some time ago came to the conclusion that the one who
actually takes care of the package _now_ is the Maintainer, and everyone
who
Hi,
2009/4/5 Biru Ionut biru.io...@gmail.com:
Hi,
My name is Biru Ionut Mircea and i'm addicted to archlinux. :)
I'm a 23 year old student from Romania, studying at University
Politehnica of Bucharest, Faculty of Automatic Control and Computer,
Computer Science department.
I'm using linux
Well, when my information was wrong.. please update the wiki!
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Package_Maintainer
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 13:09 -0400 schrieb Daenyth Blank:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 13:03, Jens Maucher jensmauc...@online.de wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 18:49 +0200
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 06:19:51PM +0200, Stefan Husmann wrote:
install -d is preferable over mkdir -p, but also in extra are
packages, that do not fullfil this point.
I think using one or the other really depends on the situation. I don't
think that's something that should be picked on at
2009/4/5 Daenyth Blank daenyth+a...@gmail.com:
That is no longer the case. I could dig up the ML thread in which it
was discussed, but I'm rather lazy. Can you link to the page that has
that wording so it can be updated?
Maintainer is the person responsible for updating the package,
I have to agree with Allan's first message on this thread. My main
reason for giving a negative vote, though, was the lack of response to
the valid point raised by Allan regarding the quality of the zatoo
package. That, and:
- Applying without having found a sponsor first.
- Poor use of English
Jaroslav Lichtblau wrote:
Hi,
I went through your packages and found out many of them have been
previously created and mainained by someone else. I would like to
see some of your own contributions, could you maybe point them out?
microblog-purple and linuxdcpp-plus-odc are my own contributions
Abhishek Dasgupta schrieb:
2009/4/5 Daenyth Blank daenyth+a...@gmail.com:
That is no longer the case. I could dig up the ML thread in which it
was discussed, but I'm rather lazy. Can you link to the page that has
that wording so it can be updated?
Maintainer is the person responsible for
We'll, although there are no real pro et contra discussion, I agree with
your observation. We should study the art of argumentation and let the
arguments speak for themselves. I hope we all change our minds regarding
good ethics and code policy.
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Jens Maucher
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 19:12:03 +0200
Jens Maucher jensmauc...@online.de wrote:
Well, when my information was wrong.. please update the wiki!
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Package_Maintainer
I've updated the page. The previous version seemed to refer only to the
maintainers of binary
2009/4/5 Lucas Salies Brum lu...@archlinux.com.br:
In line with that of the PKGBUILD:
# $ Id: PKGBUILD, v 1.12 2003/11/06 08:26:13 Exp $ dorphell
How to create it? cvs? It is mandatory?
It's a cvs tag. You don't need to use that in AUR pkgbuild, when you
find it simply remove it.
To adopt an
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 09:52:33PM +0200, Lucas Salies Brum wrote:
Hello everyone, my name is Lucas Salies Brum, i live in Brazil and this is
my first email to this list.
Hi Lucas!
Use the Arch for a while, but only now decided to help the community, before
submitting my first package to
hi, i made a PKGBUILD that comprises both sun's jdk+jre (nothing weird),
however, i'm not sure if that's OK with aur, so i thought i'd ask
first..
tell me if you need more details..
regards
M Rawash
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 23:04:47 +0200
M Rawash mraw...@gmail.com wrote:
hi, i made a PKGBUILD that comprises both sun's jdk+jre (nothing weird),
however, i'm not sure if that's OK with aur, so i thought i'd ask
first..
tell me if you need more details..
regards
M Rawash
Hi,
Both of
On Sun, 2009-04-05 at 23:45 +0200, xyne wrote:
Hi,
Both of those packages (jdk and jre) are already in the community repo. In
general you shouldn't upload packages to the AUR that already exist in
core/extra/community (I think developmental versions and other variations are
permitted
jre/jdk_beta should not be beta at all, last time I checked it it was the
stable release.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 12:04 AM, M Rawash mraw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 2009-04-05 at 23:45 +0200, xyne wrote:
Hi,
Both of those packages (jdk and jre) are already in the community repo.
In
no, not at all, you seem to be right about jdk_beta 6u14 tough :)
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 12:15 AM, M Rawash mraw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 00:07 +0200, Ali H. Caliskan wrote:
jre/jdk_beta should not be beta at all, last time I checked it it was the
stable release.
6u13 is
Decent quality packages in Community please.
- Just one member of the Arch user base
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:37 PM, xyne x...@archlinux.ca wrote:
Ali H. Caliskan ali.h.calis...@gmail.com wrote:
We'll as long as there is no human factor in stake, I believe making a
package, especially a
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Andrei Thorp gar...@gmail.com wrote:
Decent quality packages in Community please.
- Just one member of the Arch user base
Excuse me? I hope that I missunderstood what you said, but in case you
are complaining about the quality of packages in community, I just
i stopped using jre/jdk from [community] sometime ago, due to the lack
of updates and unresponsiveness of the maintainer (jre/jdk_beta were
introduced for this very reason)
The fact is that you cannot duplicate packages on AUR even if these
are more updated than existents.. If you think that
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 19:33 +1930, Angel Velásquez wrote:
i stopped using jre/jdk from [community] sometime ago, due to the lack
of updates and unresponsiveness of the maintainer (jre/jdk_beta were
introduced for this very reason)
The fact is that you cannot duplicate packages on AUR
it's *not* a duplicate, i just cited the lack of updates as one of the
reasons i forked the package, you can review sunjdk here:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=25303
regards
IMO this is a duplicate effort, because this package provided the same
as existent packages (jre,jdk) in
2009/4/5 Angel Velásquez an...@archlinux.com.ve:
and btw you can't use the
Maintainer tag since this isn't a binary package and you aren't a
TU/Dev
Didn't we just have this discussion on another thread? That's the
correct usage of the maintainer comment.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Daenyth Blank daenyth+a...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/4/5 Angel Velásquez an...@archlinux.com.ve:
and btw you can't use the
Maintainer tag since this isn't a binary package and you aren't a
TU/Dev
Didn't we just have this discussion on another thread? That's the
On Sun, 2009-04-05 at 20:25 -0400, Daenyth Blank wrote:
2009/4/5 Angel Velásquez an...@archlinux.com.ve:
i stopped using jre/jdk from [community] sometime ago, due to the lack
of updates and unresponsiveness of the maintainer (jre/jdk_beta were
introduced for this very reason)
The
Hi, this thread were discussed in the history, so I think is time to
clarify and put the correct information to the wiki. (Actually on the
recent TU application and sunjdk package).
IIRC:
a) Maintainer tag in PKGBUILD is just use for people who maintain the
binary package generated by this
not really, unless you regard kde packages in [extra] as duplicates of
those in [kde-mod]. jre and jdk is just sun's jdk split into two
packages for the sole purpose of having smaller binary packages, but
serve no purpose at all if you are building from a pkgbuild.
First of all kde-mod is a
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 08:20:41PM +1930, Angel Velásquez wrote:
Hi, this thread were discussed in the history, so I think is time to
clarify and put the correct information to the wiki. (Actually on the
recent TU application and sunjdk package).
IIRC:
a) Maintainer tag in PKGBUILD is
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 21:06, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote:
The accepted practice is to keep a contributor comment for all
significant contributors of a PKGBUILD.
I don't think it really matters if there's a maintainer comment or not.
Maintainers for all packages are tracked by other
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 03:01:46AM +0200, M Rawash wrote:
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 19:57 +1930, Angel Velásquez wrote:
it's *not* a duplicate, i just cited the lack of updates as one of the
reasons i forked the package, you can review sunjdk here:
5. Change the previous maintainer tag to a contributor tag and add
yourself as maintainer
I don't quite follow... you say that you want to improve the method,
but you insist that we don't change it and use the old one? Please
correct me if I'm wrong
This should be 4.- and it's more like
Daenyth Blank daenyth+a...@gmail.com wrote:
The analogy doesn't carry very well here.. The kdemod repos 1) are not
officially supported or endorsed, and 2) contain patches that change
functionality.
That being said, I wouldn't go so far as to entirely delete the
package, I just think it's
That being said, I wouldn't go so far as to entirely delete the
package, I just think it's a useless duplication of effort
That is my point, but according to this: [1]
Quote:
Check [core], [extra], and [community] for the package. If it is
inside any of those repositories in ANY form, DO NOT
2009/4/5 Angel Velásquez an...@archlinux.com.ve:
This should be 4.- and it's more like than my 2nd point .. then that
point about Maintainer is just because exist a binary package in
official repos and it's maintained by will be lost, so the concept
will change to Maintainer is the people who
I think it makes the most sense to designate the person currently maintaining
the package/PKGBUILD as the maintainer irrespective of that person's status in
the community or the destination of the package/PKGBUILD. It immediately
indicates to anyone looking at the PKGBUILD whom they should
As I said before, it seems like the general consensus was in favor of
changing it.
http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2008-October/002502.html
But this was the last reply [1] by foutrelis, and confused me.. seems
that even Aaron Griffin agree with having the maintainer tag for the
Here goes an section from the the PKGBUILD man page:
EXAMPLE
The following is an example PKGBUILD for the patch package. For more
examples, look through the build files of your distribution’s packages.
For those using Arch Linux, consult the ABS tree.
# Maintainer: Joe User joe.u...@example.com
I like option 1.- Should I remove the past contributor and add myself as a
Contributor?. This is exactly like it is in /usr/share/pacman/PKGBUILD.proto
example.
--
José Valecillos
2009/4/6 José Valecillos valecillo...@gmail.com:
I like option 1.- Should I remove the past contributor and add myself as a
Contributor?. This is exactly like it is in /usr/share/pacman/PKGBUILD.proto
example.
--
José Valecillos
The problem with this is that it's essentially claiming all
Then you must add all the past Contributors, even if they are 10 or 100?. On
the other hand, in the web interface or when you install the package it
don't show anything about the contributor, this should be there I think,
dont' you?. I mean, you only can know who is the contributor if you open the
2009/4/6 José Valecillos valecillo...@gmail.com:
Then you must add all the past Contributors, even if they are 10 or 100?. On
the other hand, in the web interface or when you install the package it
don't show anything about the contributor, this should be there I think,
dont' you?. I mean, you
2009/4/6 José Valecillos valecillo...@gmail.com:
Then you must add all the past Contributors, even if they are 10 or 100?. On
the other hand, in the web interface or when you install the package it
don't show anything about the contributor, this should be there I think,
dont' you?. I mean, you
2009/4/6 xyne x...@archlinux.ca:
I don't agree with that reasoning. Even though there are warnings and the
user has to enable the community repo him-/herself, there is still a
reasonable expectation of package quality which leads to a base level of
trust for community packages. The same
Agreed to Xyne and Dae, I certainly don't mean to say Community
packages are bad at the moment. In fact, no trouble so far!
:)
As suggested translations to English sayings: Talk is cheap or
perhaps Easier said than done.
Cheers,
-Andrei Garoth Thorp
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but here's my take:
- Maintainer: The person who currently maintains a package.
- Contributor: The person who first submitted the package. If a
package is so badly constructed that it needs to be rewritten from
scratch, the contributor tag would
69 matches
Mail list logo
