FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux User Repository

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-05-2009, 06:51 PM
Aaron Griffin
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Hi TUs,
>
> You may remember that we voted to move the community repo to use the
> official db scripts but not much has happened. *Can I get a status update on
> what is happening with AUR support for this? *That is the major hold-up.

Actually, the major holdup is probably me. I'm going to have to do the
svn conversion, and give all the TUs shell accounts on gerolde, and am
trying to think of a clean way to do it. But, I guess you're right
that the AUR needs some sort of changes in order to be able to do
this.
 
Old 03-05-2009, 07:12 PM
Andrea Scarpino
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

2009/3/5 Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> But, I guess you're right
> that the AUR needs some sort of changes in order to be able to do
> this.
>
Maybe we must only edit run-tupkgupdate and communitypkg on AUR?
(not sure of this)

--
Andrea `BaSh` Scarpino
Arch Linux Developer
 
Old 03-05-2009, 07:46 PM
Allan McRae
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

Andrea Scarpino wrote:

2009/3/5 Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:


But, I guess you're right
that the AUR needs some sort of changes in order to be able to do
this.



Maybe we must only edit run-tupkgupdate and communitypkg on AUR?
(not sure of this)



Well, those will not be needed at all once the switch is made. The
decision on whether to include [community] packages on the AUR interface
after the switch, or even extend it to all packages was the main issue.
I think it was decided that they were to be included, so I was wanting
to know who is doing the coding and what the progress is.


Allan
 
Old 03-05-2009, 07:50 PM
Aaron Griffin
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
> Andrea Scarpino wrote:
>>
>> 2009/3/5 Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
>>
>>>
>>> But, I guess you're right
>>> that the AUR needs some sort of changes in order to be able to do
>>> this.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Maybe we must only edit run-tupkgupdate and communitypkg on AUR?
>> (not sure of this)
>>
>
> Well, those will not be needed at all once the switch is made. *The decision
> on whether to include [community] packages on the AUR interface after the
> switch, or even extend it to all packages was the main issue. *I think it
> was decided that they were to be included, so I was wanting to know who is
> doing the coding and what the progress is.

It should be a simple matter of extending the "dummy package" process
already used for core/extra, and adding some fun stuff to actually
make them show up.
 
Old 03-05-2009, 09:28 PM
Loui Chang
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 06:46:49AM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> Andrea Scarpino wrote:
> > 2009/3/5 Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> But, I guess you're right
> >> that the AUR needs some sort of changes in order to be able to do
> >> this.
> >>
> >>
> > Maybe we must only edit run-tupkgupdate and communitypkg on AUR?
> > (not sure of this)
> >
>
> Well, those will not be needed at all once the switch is made. The decision
> on whether to include [community] packages on the AUR interface after the
> switch, or even extend it to all packages was the main issue. I think it
> was decided that they were to be included, so I was wanting to know who is
> doing the coding and what the progress is.

Hmm! That's news. I thought the consensus was that community doesn't
need AUR. And in that case we just turn the daemons and cronjobs off and
community goes on its merry way with devtools.

We would then just alter the DB to make all community packages dummies.
 
Old 03-05-2009, 09:43 PM
Allan McRae
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

Loui Chang wrote:

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 06:46:49AM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:


Andrea Scarpino wrote:


2009/3/5 Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:



But, I guess you're right
that the AUR needs some sort of changes in order to be able to do
this.




Maybe we must only edit run-tupkgupdate and communitypkg on AUR?
(not sure of this)


Well, those will not be needed at all once the switch is made. The decision
on whether to include [community] packages on the AUR interface after the
switch, or even extend it to all packages was the main issue. I think it
was decided that they were to be included, so I was wanting to know who is
doing the coding and what the progress is.



Hmm! That's news. I thought the consensus was that community doesn't
need AUR. And in that case we just turn the daemons and cronjobs off and
community goes on its merry way with devtools.

We would then just alter the DB to make all community packages dummies.



Hmm! Right back.... I thought we got to here:
http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2009-January/003648.html
which sort of says we were going to have them in the AUR along with the
rest of the repo and just disable comments. Anyway, I suppose this
could be added at any time.


But given I don't want them there, I agree that we decided [community]
does not need AUR!


Allan

Allan
 
Old 03-05-2009, 09:48 PM
Evangelos Foutras
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
> But given I don't want them there, I agree that we decided [community] does
> not need AUR!

Agreed. In my opinion, AUR should be used for unsupported packages only.
 
Old 03-05-2009, 09:50 PM
Andrea Scarpino
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

2009/3/5 Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
>> But given I don't want them there, I agree that we decided [community] does
>> not need AUR!
>
> Agreed. In my opinion, AUR should be used for unsupported packages only.
>
+1 also for me.

AUR: Arch Linux Unsupported Repository :P


--
Andrea `BaSh` Scarpino
Arch Linux Developer
 
Old 03-06-2009, 01:05 AM
Smartboy
 
Default status moving to official db scripts?

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
>> But given I don't want them there, I agree that we decided [community] does
>> not need AUR!
>
> Agreed. In my opinion, AUR should be used for unsupported packages only.
>

So then would we include the community packages at
http://www.archlinux.org/packages/ ? I kind of like that idea, keeps
things separate.

Smartboy
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:38 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org