You are not logged in.

#26 2014-01-03 21:55:20

Pank
Member
From: IT
Registered: 2009-06-13
Posts: 370

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Nowaker wrote:

Guys, stop thinking of wiping these packages. Stop thinking of numbers of packages that will need to be marked out-of-date. Stop thinking of the disaster that will come once new makepkg is released. Think of what can be done in order to **avoid** the disaster, to avoid wipe, and avoid tons of packages marked out of date. ;-)

The destruction of old packages for the sake of 'purity' does seem at bit strong.  In any case an automatic check should be tried beforehand and the owner should be informed. 

For now a 'broken' button seems great.  Of course a comment plus out-of-date or just a comment will be as good in most cases.


Arch x64 on Thinkpad X200s/W530

Offline

#27 2014-01-03 22:14:22

ANOKNUSA
Member
Registered: 2010-10-22
Posts: 2,141

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

dslink wrote:

Why not have two AUR servers, one is the current one and nothing is updated or changed on it, and the 2nd is the new one where maintainers will have to submit their packages to with the new PKGBUILD. Email all maintainers and tell them of this change. So over time the old AUR server will die out with no set time frame so comments and anything else is still online. And the new one can have flagging like maveric7911 was saying.

I know it sounds like a mess but at least you keep the data from the old server till what's needed is migrated to the new one.

That would multiply the workload of an already hard-working staff. It would be far less hassle (from the TUs' perspectives) to simply scrub the databases/servers and place a comment at the header of the AUR page, informing new users (or old users who don't pay enough attention) that the AUR will have limited functionality until maintainers get their new scripts up. After 10-11 years of great work on the part of the devs and TUs, I think a little end-user inconvenience in the way of temporary third-party software absence isn't a huge deal.

Coming up with a new way to maintain the AUR and then just starting from a new foundation presents a greater and more immediate inconvenience, but less work at once for the existing staff and maintainers. After all, the only people likely to face any real immediate trouble in the event of a total wipe are those who need third-party drivers/firmware from the AUR to get a system up and running.   

Pank wrote:

For now a 'broken' button seems great.  Of course a comment plus out-of-date or just a comment will be as good in most cases.

The "broken" button has actually been their for a while, it just works in a weird fasion: It's labeled "Add comment," and has a bug where it doesn't work unless the person clicking it leaves a detailed message in the text box above. tongue  Give people a button to flag a package as "broken," and they'll hit that anytime a package doesn't build and call it a day. If human nature were such that masses of people could be trusted to do more work than they're asked to, this discussion thread wouldn't exist. And I can admit with some embarassment that I foolishly flagged a package out-of-date once as a n00b, just because it wouldn't build.

Idea for the future: How big a problem are duplicates? Might it be possible to have a "provides" box in the submission process that runs through the database and finds similar previous submissions, helping avoid duplication?

Offline

#28 2014-01-03 22:23:48

Trilby
Forum Moderator
From: Massachusetts, USA
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 13,483
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

ANOKNUSA wrote:

Idea for the future: How big a problem are duplicates? Might it be possible to have a "provides" box in the submission process that runs through the database and finds similar previous submissions, helping avoid duplication?

What would happen if a matching previous submission was found?

Remove the previous: bad idea as someone could effecting hijack and aur package without informing the maintainer or waiting for it to be properly disowned.

Prevent the new submission: good idea, but nothing new here.  If the submitting user is willing to list all the things the package provides in a "provides" variable, then they probably also had the good sense to search to see if those already existed in the AUR.  Those who do not employ such sense in searching also will not likely employ it in listing "provides".  So would this add anything new?


InterrobangSlider
• How's my coding? See this page.
• How's my moderating? Feel free to email any concerns, complaints, or objections.

Offline

#29 2014-01-03 22:28:18

Lone_Wolf
Member
From: Netherlands, Europe
Registered: 2005-10-04
Posts: 4,149

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

maybe we could do it like this :

1. create a fresh 2nd aur server, with everything in place to add packages / comments, but no packages at all on it
2. set the current aur server in a read-only state for normal users : no new packages, no new comments etc , rename it to aur_archive
3. open the new aur server for submitting packages
4a. The maintainers of packages on aur_archive can apply to TUs to transfer package, votes and comments to the new aur server
4b . if 4a is not possible, allow package maintainers of aur_archive packages to request deletion
5. at some point in time : delete everything left on aur_archive and start again with step 1

Last edited by Lone_Wolf (2014-01-03 22:29:09)


Booting with apg Openrc, NOT systemd.
Automounting : not needed, i prefer pmount
Aur helpers : makepkg + my own local repo === rarely need them

Offline

#30 2014-01-03 22:39:54

fukawi2
Forum Moderator
From: .vic.au
Registered: 2007-09-28
Posts: 5,266
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

How about an ad-hoc process to send a notification to the maintainer of all packages without a package() function that they need to update it. Wait 2 weeks, if the package has not been updated, disown it for someone else to adopt and update.

Wait another 2 weeks and if there is still no update, then that package can be deleted/archived.

Offline

#31 2014-01-03 22:45:22

Pierre
Developer
From: Bonn
Registered: 2004-07-05
Posts: 1,950
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

I could accidentally delete all the packages.

Offline

#32 2014-01-03 22:47:12

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Pierre wrote:

I could accidentally delete all the packages.

Let's make this an annual thing.

Offline

#33 2014-01-04 00:50:29

Steef435
Member
From: age
Registered: 2013-08-29
Posts: 338
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

I'm not sure if I'm the only one, but I only get myself to clean my storage once I wipe it completely. But I think it's a bad thing to completely banish all this data from the internet. I think it's as natural to the community as the wiki is, even if some parts date back to when Geekus Primus laid the first stone.

So who's going to call the archive team? ^^

Offline

#34 2014-01-04 01:25:31

WonderWoofy
Member
From: Los Gatos, CA
Registered: 2012-05-19
Posts: 8,412

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Streef435 wrote:

But I think it's a bad thing to completely banish all this data from the internet.

All the AUR stuffs is backed up to a git repo.  So it is not as though it would simply disappear.  I can't seem to find and address to link to ATM, but I am certain that Link Master karol could come up with it pretty quick.

Offline

#35 2014-01-04 01:30:00

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Offline

#36 2014-01-04 01:33:09

2ManyDogs
Member
Registered: 2012-01-15
Posts: 1,634

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

This? http://pkgbuild.com/git/aur-mirror.git/

(edit) dammit, too slow.

Last edited by 2ManyDogs (2014-01-04 01:34:28)

Offline

#37 2014-01-04 03:31:01

donniezazen
Member
From: Salt Lake City
Registered: 2011-06-24
Posts: 671
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

All packages should me marked broken, so, they are not shown in AUR search and also not completely lost if someone wants to adopt them in near future. Maintainers can update, adopt and bring it up to new wiped AUR. This will help cleaning up things and getting rid of archaic stuff that no one uses. Cleaning up things time to time keeps it sane.

Last edited by donniezazen (2014-01-04 03:44:32)

Offline

#38 2014-01-04 05:15:57

Allan
Developer
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,357
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

As soon as we have a mark as broken button, all packages will be marked as broken.  People are assholes.   So that is not a solution.

Offline

#39 2014-01-04 08:46:49

Kremlin
Member
Registered: 2013-10-22
Posts: 10

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

it'd be nice to be able to vote patch files into aur packages, to account for when people just log out and never mark their packages as orphaned. or maybe just vote in pkgbuilds altogether, but yeah, i agree, it's kind of a mess.

Offline

#40 2014-01-04 10:15:40

donniezazen
Member
From: Salt Lake City
Registered: 2011-06-24
Posts: 671
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Allan wrote:

As soon as we have a mark as broken button, all packages will be marked as broken.  People are assholes.   So that is not a solution.

The maintainer's of the AUR should mark all packages as broken and not the users. That way they are out of AUR search and we have a clean AUR. Then package maintainers can modify and adopt the packages.

Offline

#41 2014-01-04 11:35:49

Allan
Developer
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,357
Website

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

If they package maintainers can not even maintain their package, they are not going to mark them as broken.

Offline

#42 2014-01-04 12:19:03

Thrall
Member
Registered: 2012-04-24
Posts: 15

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Pacman 4.1 has been out for ages now, with its new format for VCS PKGBUILDs. However, the extra/abs package still contains various prototype files, such as PKGBUILD-git.proto, which use the old, pre-4.1 style[1]. If we want people to write PKGBUILDs in a consistent style, I think the updating the abs package could help with cleaning up the AUR, by making it much easier for people to update or rewrite old PKGBUILDs.

cf. https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/34485 .
[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VC … Prototypes

Offline

#43 2014-01-04 19:48:20

sekret
Member
Registered: 2013-07-22
Posts: 203

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

I'm completely with Thrall here!

My template for git packages:

# Maintainer: sekret
_pkgname=NAME
pkgname=$_pkgname-git
pkgver=VERSION
pkgrel=1
pkgdesc=""
arch=('i686' 'x86_64' 'any')
url=""
license=('GPL')
groups=()
depends=()
makedepends=('git')
optdepends=()
provides=("$_pkgname")
conflicts=("$_pkgname")
replaces=()
backup=()
options=()
install=$pkgname.install
source=("$_pkgname::git+GIT_URL#branch=BRANCH")
noextract=()
md5sums=('SKIP') # use makepkg -g to calculate the md5sums

pkgver() {
  cd "$_pkgname"
  echo "$(git log -1 --format="%cd" --date=short | sed 's|-||g').$(git rev-list --count master)"
}

prepare() {
  cd "$_pkgname"
  git apply patch.diff
}

build() {
  cd "$_pkgname"
  ./autogen.sh
  ./configure --prefix=/usr
  make
}

package() {
  cd "$_pkgname"
  make DESTDIR="$pkgdir/" install
}

# vim:set ts=2 sw=2 et:

edit: Yeah I know I shouldn't use $SRCDEST but rather put stuff into sources=(), we've had this discussion before and I get your point. So I removed it from this template.

The different pkgver functions are also very messy in the AUR. That's why I chose the one in this template. It always works and pacman + all the AUR helpers will always see a new version as new.

Just a suggestion.. The important thing is to finally deal with this, so thanks for bringing it up and also thanks to the pacman devs for enforcing this with the next release. I often comment on AUR packages providing help for a better PKGBUILD and I don't mind taking my time for it, because most of the time people are thankful and fix their PKGBUILDs. But this shouldn't be necessary. Of course there are always people who don't have the skills. I also didn't have them when I started using Archlinux. So give them a good start with a good template and they'll happily take it (if it's easy to find, so I recommend putting a link on the upload page for packages with a "Have you checked our template for beautiful PKGBUILD files?" or something alike)

Last edited by sekret (2014-01-04 19:51:19)

Offline

#44 2014-01-05 12:15:22

mar04
Member
From: Poland
Registered: 2010-02-08
Posts: 116

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

My suggestion would be to set a timer for each package. When time is up package is automatically removed. Set it to some sane value, 2-3 months, and provide maintainer of the package with a button to reset the timer. Maybe set up a some email notification "next week ${package} will be auto-removed". Timer should be visible for users so they can adopt packages they care about in time.
Alternatively for each package provide a button 'keep me' and every 3 months automatically delete all packages that were not marked as 'keep me'. Reset marks, repeat.

Offline

#45 2014-01-05 15:36:19

lolilolicon
Member
Registered: 2009-03-05
Posts: 1,676

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

If we're thinking out loud here of a new AUR from ground zero, here're some ideas. IMO there are two issues particularly worth some thought: a better voting system, and a mechanism for smoother package ownership transfers.

Imagine a stackoverflow kind of voting system: An AUR package page is consisted of a "question" with the pkgname and some basic info, and "answers" which are proposed PKGBUILDs etc. Users can upload "answers", comment on the "question" or any of the "answers", as well as "vote up" or "vote down" each "answer". The "answer" with the most votes becomes automatically the "accepted answer", and the user who posted this "answer" the maintainer.

I'm not sure of the best way to handle version bumps here. I think we can keep each AUR package page versioned (e.g. URI https://aur.archlinux.org/$pkgname/$pkgver), and a new version of a package would start with zero "answer". To avoid abuse, either only the current maintainer has the right to bump the pkgver, or a version-bumped "answer" must get a minimum number of votes to create a new version of the page.

A rough idea, but I hope it inspires some improvement.


This silver ladybug at line 28...

Offline

#46 2014-01-05 16:51:38

Mr.Elendig
#archlinux@freenode channel op
From: The intertubes
Registered: 2004-11-07
Posts: 3,714

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Nowaker wrote:

> either remove packages or remove packages, and have crap in AUR for a long time

I don't like neither of these approaches. I'd suggest to:

1. Create a wiki page with instructions on how to migrate packages to the new syntax
2. Write a simple script that will name all the AUR packages that won't work in new Pacman.
3. Mass-mail maintainers whose PKGBUILDs are identified by the script. Link to the wiki page and warn them the packages will be disowned if not fixed after X weeks.

I went on a small rampage a few weeks ago and sent out 30ish emails to maintainers of outdated/broken packages.

Result?
15+ bounced mails
3 replies
2 updated packages (one of them only a version bump, no port to new syntax)

The aur cleanup days we have had havn't really been much more efficient either.

Last edited by Mr.Elendig (2014-01-05 16:52:47)


Evil #archlinux@freenode channel op and general support dude.
. files on github, Screenshots, Random pics and the rest

Offline

#47 2014-01-05 17:38:29

ANOKNUSA
Member
Registered: 2010-10-22
Posts: 2,141

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

mar04 wrote:

My suggestion would be to set a timer for each package fine for a speeding violation. When time is up package the fine is automatically removed enforced. Set it to some sane value, 2-3 months, and provide maintainer of person charged with the package violation with a button to reset the timer. Maybe set up a some email notification "next week ${package} ${dollar amount} will be auto-removed auto-debited". Timer should be visible for users so they can adopt packages they care about hit the magic "avoid consequences" button in time.

Alternatively for each package provide a button 'keep forgive me' and every 3 months automatically delete charge all packages fines that were not marked as 'keep forgive me'. Reset marks, repeat.

Offering people who have arguably reneged on a responsibility the opportunity to continue to renege is not a valid enforcement strategy. wink

@Trilby: Good points all. My suggestion might actually raise more trouble than its worth. Your comment does bring another possibility to mind for AUR maintenance, though: Some sort of report-and-trump system, where packages with incorrect syntax can be reported, then trumped/cleaned up by a new adopter. Make the rules for submitting a package to the AUR clear from the outset, remind submitters to review their packages before submission, and summarily and unilaterally remove any package that violates those rules, period. When a TU deletes a package that violates the rules, they can send an email/PM to the submitter alerting them to the reason; too many removals, and submission privileges are revoked. Flagging a package as out-of-date or as having incorrect syntax starts a one- or two-week timer, after which a notification is emailed to a TU. That TU can then review the package and opt to delete it; if a maintainer has an out-of-date package deleted in that manner, their package submission privileges are suspended for a 7-day period (or some such). Deletion would of course be a totally evaluative/subjective call, though, and the TUs may deem the whole system too complex to be worth the trouble of setting up.

Offline

#48 2014-01-05 18:24:14

nd7rmn8
Member
Registered: 2013-12-08
Posts: 9

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

lolilolicon wrote:

If we're thinking out loud here of a new AUR from ground zero, here're some ideas. IMO there are two issues particularly worth some thought: a better voting system, and a mechanism for smoother package ownership transfers.

I'm new here, and I haven't yet contributed to AUR (someday I hope to), so my question may be exceedingly dumb, but is there a way to share ownership of a package between multiple people?  As long as one of them is active, the package would be maintained.  Of course, this may be a horrible idea... in which case, feel free to mock it.


i just cant stop thinking about how much smarter id be if i would have started reading years ago instead of skimming to find the answer...

tl;dr, meh

Offline

#49 2014-01-05 18:28:49

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

Currently there is no way to do it, but anyone can post updated / fixed PKGBUILDs in the comments.
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17911

Last edited by karol (2014-01-05 18:29:36)

Offline

#50 2014-01-05 18:57:26

mar04
Member
From: Poland
Registered: 2010-02-08
Posts: 116

Re: Aur is a friggin mess, I propose either a serious cleanup or a whipe.

ANOKNUSA wrote:

Offering people who have arguably reneged on a responsibility the opportunity to continue to renege is not a valid enforcement strategy. wink

No, it's not an enforcement strategy.

I think we can break problem with AUR in two cases:
1. Garbage packages no one cares about.
2. Badly maintained packages.

`1. Mostly orphans, but also packages owned by users who stopped using Arch and didn't bother to orphan.  And there are surprisingly many active users who own obsolete packages they didn't bother to delete and just leave a comment "it's broken"/"it's replaced by ..."/"dead upstream"/"don't use it, use ... instead". 
What I propose is an (arch-user-)automated garbage collection which should get rid of most of that packages.

`2. There are maintainers who produce/maintain poor quality packages, and I don't assume bad faith here, just lack of knowledge/skill/discipline.  As you noticed my suggestion doesn't solve this part of the problem, neither does yours - take a look at how many packages there are and how many TU to review them. Same goes for scraping it all - it would be one time, intrusive solution for the first part of the problem. Bad packages will be submitted again. What I would do: run namcap on every submitted package and auto reject on errors and warnings with a possibility to appeal to TUs.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB