the problem of the rotting packages

farvardin · 2008-11-09 09:53:01

hello,

some packages in AUR are obviously no longer maintained by their maintainers.

Could it be possible improve the AUR system so packages that are flagged out of date and not updated after some months could be automatically orphaned so someone else could take care of it? In addition packages that are flagged out of date by several people could be orphaned quicker because it would mean they are more needed.

Army · 2008-11-09 10:04:30

Good point! Some time ago this would have been a problem, because people were able to remove the orphaned packages without any problem. Now this isn't possible anymore, so it should not be a problem for the old maintainer to eventually get it back, if (s)he wishes.

Dieter@be · 2008-11-09 10:24:44

You can already flag a package out of date. I don't see why any action would need to happen automatically (like pruning or whatever).
If you see it's out of date you can not install it if you want.

Maybe some "statistics" page could be useful though: A page where all outdated packages are listed, sorted by the amount of people who flagged it

Allan · 2008-11-09 10:30:30

If you want a package orphaned then you send an email to the aur-general list and a TU will do it for you.

farvardin · 2008-11-09 10:51:11

If you see it's out of date you can not install it if you want.

the problem is if 20 people see it's out of date, and they need it, they may make their own pkgbuild themselves only because someone didn't care to maintain the one which is on AUR, maybe those persons have moved to another distro and such.

I don't see why any action would need to happen automatically

I don't request it's done automatically after one week being out of date. It could be done automatically after 3 ou 4 months, or earlier if enough people vote so. It wouldn't delete the package, only allowing someone more carefull to take care of it.

We can wonder also why some offical packages are not updated correctly. See this one:

http://www.archlinux.org/packages/search/?q=abcm2ps

there is one called abcm2ps-devel. The latest devel version is not 5.5.2, but 5.9.1. It was "updated" recently but not to match the current devel version. I've flagged it out of date a long time ago, but nothing was done.

So do we have to create a "package-latest" on AUR, and later someone may create a "package-truly-latest" if "package-latest" is not updated?

then you send an email to the aur-general list

ok, I may think to this possibility.

Last edited by farvardin (2008-11-09 10:53:20)

Allan · 2008-11-09 11:19:17

farvardin wrote:

So do we have to create a "package-latest" on AUR, and later someone may create a "package-truly-latest" if "package-latest" is not updated?

No, because they will be deleted. Asking for packages to be orphaned is the way to go.

catwell · 2008-11-09 17:33:38

farvardin wrote:

We can wonder also why some offical packages are not updated correctly. See this one:
http://www.archlinux.org/packages/search/?q=abcm2ps
there is one called abcm2ps-devel. The latest devel version is not 5.5.2, but 5.9.1. It was "updated" recently but not to match the current devel version. I've flagged it out of date a long time ago, but nothing was done.

It also has no maintainer, and I don't really understand why it has to be in extra, so I guess you could mail the list and ask that it's dropped to community or even unsupported.

farvardin · 2008-11-09 17:42:40

yes, you're right, I didn't even notice that.

It's typically the kind of thing that could be automatically checked and done.

vkumar · 2008-11-10 04:43:57

package-truly-really-very_probably-latest

Arch Linux

#1 2008-11-09 09:53:01

the problem of the rotting packages

#2 2008-11-09 10:04:30

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

#3 2008-11-09 10:24:44

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

#4 2008-11-09 10:30:30

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

#5 2008-11-09 10:51:11

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

#6 2008-11-09 11:19:17

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

#7 2008-11-09 17:33:38

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

#8 2008-11-09 17:42:40

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

#9 2008-11-10 04:43:57

Re: the problem of the rotting packages

Board footer