Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   ArchLinux User Repository (http://www.linux-archive.org/archlinux-user-repository/)
-   -   Automated Package Removal (http://www.linux-archive.org/archlinux-user-repository/654091-automated-package-removal.html)

"Daniel Campbell" 04-09-2012 07:46 AM

Automated Package Removal
 
It is simple, actually. When a user uploads a package, they should be given rights to remove it if need be. Simply claiming an orphan wouldn't grant the rights. That way only mods and original uploaders would get permission to remove packages and it wouldn't be prone to abuse. It would also contribute less clutter to the mailing list and less hassle for people that make innocuous mistakes like mine. Bureaucracy cripples everything.

Sorry for not quoting. My phone isn't fancy enough for it.

Sent from my Nokia phone

Bartłomiej Piotrowski 04-09-2012 07:50 AM

Automated Package Removal
 
On 04/09/2012 09:46 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> It is simple, actually. When a user uploads a package, they should be given rights to remove it if need be. Simply claiming an orphan wouldn't grant the rights. That way only mods and original uploaders would get permission to remove packages and it wouldn't be prone to abuse. It would also contribute less clutter to the mailing list and less hassle for people that make innocuous mistakes like mine. Bureaucracy cripples everything.
>
> Sorry for not quoting. My phone isn't fancy enough for it.
>
> Sent from my Nokia phone

It's often said: patches welcome. You can fill feature request on our
bugtracker.

--
Bartłomiej Piotrowski
Arch Linux Trusted User
http://archlinux.org/

"Daniel Campbell" 04-09-2012 07:56 AM

Automated Package Removal
 
I would contribute if a. My dev machine had internet and b. If i thought my work had a chance of being considered. Given that I'm not a TU or a regular among the devs, my work would not likely be accepted.

I guess things will stay as they are until someone important dislikes them. I'm not one for jumping through hoops.

Sent from my Nokia phone

Allan McRae 04-09-2012 08:28 AM

Automated Package Removal
 
On 09/04/12 17:56, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> I would contribute if a. My dev machine had internet and b. If i thought my work had a chance of being considered. Given that I'm not a TU or a regular among the devs, my work would not likely be accepted.

What a load of crap... Everyone submitted their first patch at one stage.

Oon-Ee Ng 04-09-2012 10:24 AM

Automated Package Removal
 
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 09/04/12 17:56, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>> I would contribute if a. My dev machine had internet and b. If i thought my work had a chance of being considered. Given that I'm not a TU or a regular among the devs, my work would not likely be accepted.
>
> What a load of crap... *Everyone submitted their first patch at one stage.
>
I'd be interested to know WHY you think your work has no chance of
being considered. Just look at the recent history of netcfg, as long
as someone's working on it there's no bureaucracy or any such crap.

Xyne 04-09-2012 05:15 PM

Automated Package Removal
 
> It would also contribute less clutter to the mailing list and less hassle for people that make innocuous mistakes like mine. Bureaucracy cripples everything.

Is it really "crippling" to send an email to this list to request deletion?

Regardless, I'm not against allowing submitters to delete their own packages,
but there should probably be some time limit to prevent abuse, e.g. within 24
hours of submission.

"Daniel Campbell" 04-09-2012 06:16 PM

Automated Package Removal
 
Yes, it's annoying (and inefficient and illogical) to require someone to sign up to another service to ask for something to be done on the service they're having issue with. Departmentalizing things is a sign of bureaucracy. Most people dislike it in government, hospitals, business, and other institutions; why on Earth would we voluntarily do it in FOSS? Especially when the majority of problems (e.g. Deleting packages) can be solved by a machine.

Politics aside, I agree that a grace period would be good. But perhaps a little longer than a single day? Maybe 3-7 days, to account for real life getting in the way.

Another thing came to me as I was thinking about this issue. People that adopt an orphan package are able to upload a new src tarball, right? If so, then perhaps all that needs to be done is expanding the table to indicate which user created the package (first uploaded it) and give them permission to delete for the given grace period. I assume the required 'infrastructure' such as upload timestamps, user permissions, etc are in place already. Just an idea.

Sent from my Nokia phone
-----Original Message-----
From: Xyne
Sent: 2012-04-09 13:15:13
To: aur-general@archlinux.org
Cc: dlcampbell@gmx.com
Subject: Re: [aur-general] Automated Package Removal

> It would also contribute less clutter to the mailing list and less hassle for people that make innocuous mistakes like mine. Bureaucracy cripples everything.

Is it really "crippling" to send an email to this list to request deletion?

Regardless, I'm not against allowing submitters to delete their own packages,
but there should probably be some time limit to prevent abuse, e.g. within 24
hours of submission.

Karol Blazewicz 04-09-2012 08:23 PM

Automated Package Removal
 
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Daniel Campbell <dlcampbell@gmx.com> wrote:
>> It would also contribute less clutter to the mailing list and less hassle for people that make innocuous mistakes like mine. Bureaucracy cripples everything.
> Yes, it's annoying (and inefficient and illogical) to require someone to sign up to another service to ask for something to be done on the service they're having issue with. Departmentalizing things is a sign of bureaucracy. Most people dislike it in government, hospitals, business, and other institutions; why on Earth would we voluntarily do it in FOSS? Especially when the majority of problems (e.g. Deleting packages) can be solved by a machine.

The 'paper trail' in bureaucracy is often used for accountability purpose.


> Politics aside, I agree that a grace period would be good. But perhaps a little longer than a single day? Maybe 3-7 days, to account for real life getting in the way.

You say you didn't properly test the package and you need up to a week
to fix it?
I guess the current system allows for such things too (albeit via a
TU) so why not ...

"Daniel Campbell" 04-09-2012 08:38 PM

Automated Package Removal
 
Most systems already do the paper-trailing for us. They're known as logs.

----- Original Message -----
From: Karol Blazewicz
Sent: 04/09/12 04:23 PM
To: dlcampbell@gmx.com, Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)
Subject: Re: [aur-general] Automated Package Removal

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Daniel Campbell <dlcampbell@gmx.com> wrote:
>> It would also contribute less clutter to the mailing list and less hassle for people that make innocuous mistakes like mine. Bureaucracy cripples everything.
> Yes, it's annoying (and inefficient and illogical) to require someone to sign up to another service to ask for something to be done on the service they're having issue with. Departmentalizing things is a sign of bureaucracy. Most people dislike it in government, hospitals, business, and other institutions; why on Earth would we voluntarily do it in FOSS? Especially when the majority of problems (e.g. Deleting packages) can be solved by a machine.

The 'paper trail' in bureaucracy is often used for accountability purpose.


> Politics aside, I agree that a grace period would be good. But perhaps a little longer than a single day? Maybe 3-7 days, to account for real life getting in the way.

You say you didn't properly test the package and you need up to a week
to fix it?
I guess the current system allows for such things too (albeit via a
TU) so why not ...

"Daniel Campbell" 04-09-2012 09:51 PM

Automated Package Removal
 
Are you being glib? I achieved what I was aiming for (deleting a package). Given the reponse I got on my observation ('patches welcome'), I don't feel inclined to go through another hoop in yet another department just to be told 'no, do it yourself and we _might_ consider it'. No sense in repeating the popular opinion in another format.

And if most people are happy with the bureaucracy, who am I to change it? It's not my project or my website. I carry no clout or weight among the staff. It would be a waste of time to submit a feature request for something that is clearly against the consensus.

I'd have more luck forking the AUR and hacking it privately, assuming I felt passionately enough about it to spend even more time on the issue.

Tldr: no, it won't achieve anything.

Sent from my Nokia phone
-----Original Message-----
From: Karol Blazewicz
Sent: 2012-04-09 17:40:55
Subject: Re: [aur-general] Automated Package Removal

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 10:38 PM, Daniel Campbell <dlcampbell@gmx.com> wrote:
> Most systems already do the paper-trailing for us. They're known as logs.

Yup. Even if regular users don't have access to said log, asking a TU
once in a blue moon to check wtf is/was going on with some package is
OK.

Have you opened a feature request on the bugtracker for this?


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:19 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.