Discussion:
[arch-dev-public] proposal to add "aurpublish" to community
(too old to reply)
WorMzy Tykashi via arch-general
2018-07-20 08:23:27 UTC
Permalink
I would like to add this to [community], but I'm unsure what people
think about this; specifically, whether this might come too close to
"supporting the AUR via [community] packages". Note that this is
*not*
an AUR helper and is strictly a tool for package *maintainers* to use
during the process of uploading.
Uploaders are fine by me and I think we had one in previously.
From what I can recall, we had one in, some discussion and it was gone
again. I'll try to find the post in the archives.
Gotcha, it was cower. [1]
[1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-
December/012763.html
--
Jelle van der Waa
(apologies for crosslist posting)

For uploaders, there was 'burp' in [extra] which which was added without
any serious opposition, and remained in the repos until shortly after AUR4
was launched (which made it redundant). See
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2012-April/022787.html
and https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/46210

Cheers,


WorMzy
Eli Schwartz via arch-general
2018-07-22 16:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by WorMzy Tykashi via arch-general
I would like to add this to [community], but I'm unsure what people
think about this; specifically, whether this might come too close to
"supporting the AUR via [community] packages". Note that this is
*not*
an AUR helper and is strictly a tool for package *maintainers* to use
during the process of uploading.
Uploaders are fine by me and I think we had one in previously.
From what I can recall, we had one in, some discussion and it was gone
again. I'll try to find the post in the archives.
Gotcha, it was cower. [1]
[1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-
December/012763.html
--
Jelle van der Waa
(apologies for crosslist posting)
For uploaders, there was 'burp' in [extra] which which was added without
any serious opposition, and remained in the repos until shortly after AUR4
was launched (which made it redundant). See
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2012-April/022787.html
and https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/46210
Cheers,
WorMzy
So yeah, it seems like at least in the past there's been a distinction
made between uploaders (burp, aurpublish) and downloaders (cower).

Anyway if no one has a serious objection by the end of the week I guess
I will add it. :)
--
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-general
2018-07-23 00:22:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
So yeah, it seems like at least in the past there's been a distinction
made between uploaders (burp, aurpublish) and downloaders (cower).
Anyway if no one has a serious objection by the end of the week I guess
I will add it. :)
As long as you don't add downloading and/or packaging functionality in the
future, I'm okay with it being in [community] as well. As side note, I didn't
knew about it, and I'm thing it's great. I had a hack to update all my repos.
Guess I'll start using aurpublish.

Regards,
Giancarlo Razzolini
Eli Schwartz via arch-general
2018-07-29 16:24:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eli Schwartz via arch-general
Post by WorMzy Tykashi via arch-general
I would like to add this to [community], but I'm unsure what people
think about this; specifically, whether this might come too close to
"supporting the AUR via [community] packages". Note that this is
*not*
an AUR helper and is strictly a tool for package *maintainers* to use
during the process of uploading.
Uploaders are fine by me and I think we had one in previously.
From what I can recall, we had one in, some discussion and it was gone
again. I'll try to find the post in the archives.
Gotcha, it was cower. [1]
[1] https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-
December/012763.html
--
Jelle van der Waa
(apologies for crosslist posting)
For uploaders, there was 'burp' in [extra] which which was added without
any serious opposition, and remained in the repos until shortly after AUR4
was launched (which made it redundant). See
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2012-April/022787.html
and https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/46210
Cheers,
WorMzy
So yeah, it seems like at least in the past there's been a distinction
made between uploaders (burp, aurpublish) and downloaders (cower).
Anyway if no one has a serious objection by the end of the week I guess
I will add it. :)
I've just added it to [community]. :)
--
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
Loading...