Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR? (Read 1691 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #15 –
Quote from: artoo – on
I am not really in favor setting up an AUR for artix, it would mean lots of overhead  with arch AUR and lots of unnecessary work to be done.

I don't expect this answer to change anytime soon. We're still working on improving our build process/infrastructure, which is more important.

libratbag is in Arch's extra repo, making it a good candidate for inclusion in Artix's world repo should a maintainer wish to do so.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #16 –
Quote from: andyscott – on
Quote from: dreieck – on
It was the argument given in the deletion request message.

That's fair, I realize I was asking some pointed questions and I don't expect you to defend the person that wants your packages deleted.
I do not want to defend anyone; with regards to persons I am neutral.
I only want to have clarity about the arguments and their scope.

I see that the argument of the person who wants my package deleted seems not to be backed up with the Arch Wiki, but much of the discussion here I was racting upon was based on the arguments the person gave -- and so I tried to clarify that scope and how far this argument reaches (or rather, does not reach).

Quote from: andyscott – on
again not directed at you personally
I did not understand anything targeted at me.

I find the whole situation totally annoying, yes, since the AUR is a convenient way to maintain packages and get some search, dependency resolution and update automatic (with wrappers like yay). 
I am curoius what the reaction to my question
Quote from: dreieck – on
I was asking back via emailQuote from: dreieck
Quote
Can you please provide me the rule that states that?

I have read https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines
and do not find that rule there.
back to MarsSeed and the AUR requests list is.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #17 –
Well I'm glad you don't feel like I was too aggressive. I'm curious to see what the response is as well. It's not like there's never been a package in the AUR that displaced packages in core or even the base group. SELinux PKGBUILDs, ARM PKGBUILDs... Those can't be installed with packages from core. They can't even be used with the mainline kernels. The only difference is that the SELinux PKGBUILD is written in such a way that it handles the dependency issues by installing other packages (from the AUR again, not core). Then we have Arch ARM which is no more officially affiliated with Arch than we are to my knowledge, so to me it would require some very special mental gymnastics to say that those packages belong in the AUR when yours don't.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #18 –
There could be a problem - but with MarsSeed getting a little over-enthusiastic....
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=291449
Looks like some Arch AUR maintainers have already run into this issue!  :D
Edit: It seems you won't get a reply from MarsSeed as his account was suspended, according to the AUR mailing lists.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #19 –
Interesting, and I see that he spammed aur-general earlier today demanding that his account be reinstated. If nothing else the numerous complaints about him as well as Foxboron's reply on that thread helped me smile and left me feeling a little vindicated.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #20 –
Quote from: ####### – on
Edit: It seems you won't get a reply from MarsSeed as his account was suspended, according to the AUR mailing lists.
I emailed that person directly, too.

I now also asked for it here on the Arch forum.

Maybe that also helps to escalate the issue high enough so that clarity (regardless to which side) will be reached.

Regards!

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #21 –
Don't worry about escalating, that's just playing into his plan - Mars = God of war, MarsSeed = sowing the seeds of conflict, ie it's just some trouble maker, (possibly even some crazed AI bot) from another OS or distro out to cause trouble amongst Arch and derivatives. You see this from time to time, some apparently super keen volunteer worms their way in by making themselves invaluable then starts ruining things and causing trouble for whatever reason. It was only after he had been exposed on the Arch forum that he then launched his deletion requests at you, it was a final salvo because he knew he was on the way out. It's like spam / scam / junk mail - report it, ignore it, delete it, don't reply to it or click on the links!  ;D
MarsSeed doesn't speak for Arch or the AUR as they suspended his account and no-one else asked for your packages to be deleted so that seems pretty clear to me.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #22 –
Can we please have a reality check?

The AUR is for PKGBUILD's that are compatible with Arch.
The whole place is a mess and littered with old / unmaintained / broken PKGBUILD's
So it's not a great surprise that packages which don't belong there have been able to stay there for a long time.

It surprises me a little the ALARM packages are not allowed (ALARM is in part sanctioned by Arch. I can't find the link now but they at least have permission to use the name & logo etc) but by their guidelines the only architecture allowed is 'x86_64'
Quote
Architectures
The arch array should contain 'x86_64' if the compiled package is architecture-specific. Otherwise, use 'any' for architecture independent packages.
It surprises not at all that the guidelines don't specifically state that packages should be compatible with 'Arch Linux'
Because that would be considered implicit in a document called "Arch package guidelines" which is used by Arch User Repository Maintainers" to help decide if packages are compliant and can be included in the Arch User Repository.

The devs here have said enough times "Artix is not Arch". Which it isn't.
So why get indignant when user packages clearly aimed at Artix and not compatible with Arch are deleted from the AUR.

The behaviour of the maintainer in question is another issue. It seems they have been ruffling feathers for quite a while but reading through the main thread about it on their mailing list it was full of 'Newspeak' and contrived drama imho. Let them get on with it!
But reading other AUR mailing list threads going back some years it appears the consensus is they only want x86_64 packages which are installable on Arch

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #23 –
Do you have an alternative in mind or is it just your turn to get worked up?

I'm cool either way, I let myself get angry after all, it's just not clear to me what you're trying to accomplish by reiterating all that

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #24 –
Quote from: ####### – on
Or possibly someone would add your package to the repos by request.
Incidentally, the source code for the AUR is opensource, it would be possible to use this to make a clone website if it was really required, so long as it didn't have too many packages or too much user traffic then it could potentially be hosted by free online server space providers.


It seems like a horsepill for the smal development team to swallow.  Could these few packages not just be added to  gremlins or something?

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #25 –
It so happens I have an AUR package https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mongodb-runit it explicitly mentions artix in the info. When I suggested it after discussion in the Artix forum I was explicitly advised not to have the name mention artix.

Out of curiosity I find many AUR packages mention runit and artix see

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages?O=0&SeB=nd&K=runit&outdated=&SB=p&SO=d&PP=50&submit=Go
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages?O=0&SeB=nd&K=artix&outdated=&SB=p&SO=d&PP=50&submit=Go

so perhaps the AUR isn't as closely controlled after all.

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #26 –
Quote from: gripped – on
en user packages clearly aimed at Artix and not compatible with Arch are deleted from the AUR.

The behaviour of the maintainer in question is another issue. It seems they have been ruffling feathers for quite a while but reading through the main thread about it on their mailing list it was full of 'Newspeak' and contrived drama imho. Let them get on with it!
But reading other AUR mailing list threads going back some years it appears the consensus is they only want x86_64 packages which are installable on Arch


Is it possible to install something from github with pacman?

Re: AUR does not allow Artix-specific packages. Can we have an Artix-AUR?

Reply #27 –
Just to reiterate the stance, no artix specific AUR will happen any time soon, if at all.
Reason, we are fully busy with the amount of work already present, and we won't open our gitea instance for non artix team members, ie users.
An Artix AUR would be another gitea instance, we are not overstaffed to do this and maintain it.
I am aware with certain  inconveniences using AUR, but it won't change the current stance.

Quote from: dreieck – on
Ahoj,

I also read in the above comment from "MarsSeed" that "Artix [...] their repos are open to hosting even -git packages.". 



Please, dear arch team, time to bury this myth, this is simply not true.