AUR co-maintainence?

jdhore · 2008-08-20 21:54:12

I think there should be a way for 2 people to co-maintain a package in the AUR. Let's say me and a friend are both developers of a certain app and i release a update while he's away...I'd like to be able to update that package in AUR without waiting for him to come back or asking him for his login information. It can probably be done very easily (put a co-maintain button on packages, and when someone clicks it, the AUR sends the package owner a email saying something like: "$USER would like to co-maintain $PACKAGE with you, please click this link to accept or contact $USER").

I just think it's a good idea and will probably seriously cut down on the number of out-of-date packages in the AUR.

Dusty · 2008-08-20 23:32:36

Great idea. This would require a patch to the aur code.

vogt · 2008-08-21 03:12:50

Right now you can create a new account and share that password to get the same effect a bit less flexibly.

Stefan Husmann · 2008-08-22 11:30:21

vogt wrote:

Right now you can create a new account and share that password to get the same effect a bit less flexibly.

But then the packager has to share all of his packages with his co-maintainer, or to create a new account. Having one maintainer with several accounts is a bad idea I think.

How are the arch-haskell peoble dealing with this?

rooloo · 2008-08-22 14:57:09

Be nice to use something like git. To be able to work in two seperate branches and then combine the branches later to come up with the final result.

Then you would only need one account to up the package to the AUR from the master git branch.

git was designed for this exact sort of purpose. The ability to let multiple people work on the same project w/o stepping on other peoples toes while still providing high efficiency.

even though this approach may be way outside the scope of this project,

Daenyth · 2008-08-22 17:05:44

I second that git suggestion, once you get used to it (few days to a week tops), it's fantastic. Github makes hosting really simple also.

genisis300 · 2008-08-22 23:03:22

would it not be possible to have a tag for public ownership, This would allow anyone to download the PKGBuild modify it and reupload it, that would eliminate the need for sharing accounts etc?

or even have a system that if the the PKGBUILD is orphaned for more than 30days it automaticly becomes a public PKGBUILD until someone takes it on,

This would allow for faster updates/bugfixes

rooloo · 2008-08-23 01:30:18

genisis300 wrote:

would it not be possible to have a tag for public ownership, This would allow anyone to download the PKGBuild modify it and reupload it, that would eliminate the need for sharing accounts etc?
or even have a system that if the the PKGBUILD is orphaned for more than 30days it automaticly becomes a public PKGBUILD until someone takes it on,
This would allow for faster updates/bugfixes

bad idea, a lot of new arch linux users expect these AUR packages to just work. If you allow public access then you are essentialy taking away any form of validity to the package, as anyone can do anything to the package. Including making it malicious. Grant it, that could happen anyway, but there is a less of a chance if the packages are kept private.

Public access just screams trouble in my opinion.

I personally have come to trust a few AUR members quite a bit as I use their packages. So any future packages I d/l and build from that member I never have a need to worry.

genisis300 · 2008-08-23 18:10:47

i was thinking about that, i didn't mean public as in any joe blog, maybe have it linked to the forums and that maybe poeple with x number of posts could alter PKGBUILD

iphitus · 2008-08-24 01:44:08

genisis300 wrote:

i was thinking about that, i didn't mean public as in any joe blog, maybe have it linked to the forums and that maybe poeple with x number of posts could alter PKGBUILD

postcount ++

can I haz packages now?

rooloo · 2008-08-24 02:32:59

iphitus wrote:

genisis300 wrote:
i was thinking about that, i didn't mean public as in any joe blog, maybe have it linked to the forums and that maybe poeple with x number of posts could alter PKGBUILD
postcount ++
can I haz packages now?

exactly!!

++

ornitorrincos · 2008-08-24 18:20:30

iphitus wrote:

genisis300 wrote:
i was thinking about that, i didn't mean public as in any joe blog, maybe have it linked to the forums and that maybe poeple with x number of posts could alter PKGBUILD
postcount ++
can I haz packages now?

I made a package four you, but I ate it.

moljac024 · 2008-08-24 18:34:08

Let's start a 100 "what do you think of ..." threads so everybody can have a 4-digit post count for the purposes of altering PKGBUILDS!

Arch Linux

#1 2008-08-20 21:54:12

AUR co-maintainence?

#2 2008-08-20 23:32:36

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#3 2008-08-21 03:12:50

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#4 2008-08-22 11:30:21

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#5 2008-08-22 14:57:09

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#6 2008-08-22 17:05:44

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#7 2008-08-22 23:03:22

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#8 2008-08-23 01:30:18

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#9 2008-08-23 18:10:47

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#10 2008-08-24 01:44:08

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#11 2008-08-24 02:32:59

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#12 2008-08-24 18:20:30

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

#13 2008-08-24 18:34:08

Re: AUR co-maintainence?

Board footer