On 02/08/13 02:02, Karol Blazewicz wrote: > Intro: > Below are some questions / ideas I came up with. I simply don't know > if anyone cares about these issues, whether there are rules or at > least suggestions how to best deal with them or is it up to the > maintainer. > > I've heard there were some plans wrt a build server that would > periodically check if packages still build. Any news? I see I have just received word that a proof-of-concept for the idea is available. So there is some progress. > If there indeed are issues that need fixing, should I file the > low-priority bugs now? Summer vacation may not be the best time for > Arch-related work so maybe I should wait until September so that > people are back from holidays? I'm fairly sure summer holidays are in the end of December/start of January, so that should not be an issue! :D > Upstream urls: > I found that dozens of packages in the repos have an upstream url that > prints 'Page Not Found' in one way or another. Should I open bug > reports for these packages or does nobody care about it? I could also > check if the source is still available. If opening bug reports is OK, > should I limit creating the reports to e.g. 10 a day? > If I find a url that works, I will include it as a suggestion for the > maintainer. If there are bugs, open bugs. The bug tracker is for tracking bugs... It does not matter how many are opened. Even better if you provide a solution in the bug. We can close bugs far quicker than you can create them, so that will never be a real issue. > For example for > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/i686/autocutsel/ neither > the url nor the source is available, but I found what seems like a > perfectly good autocutsel website: http://www.nongnu.org/autocutsel/ > with a link to the source. File a bug. > Some projects seem to be gone for good e.g. > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/i686/apricots/ even grabs the > sources from ftp.archlinux.org > https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/plain/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/apricots > Would http://freecode.com/projects/apricots be a better website? It > has some info e.g. that last development is from a decade ago, a > screenshot, a longer description ... I'd say such packages should just be dropped altogether. > What about urls that point to a redirect? Is it OK only if the > redirect is automatic and otherwise upstream urls should be updated if > they moved e.g. from SourceForge to GoogleCode? > An example: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/any/junit/ has > http://junit.sourceforge.net/ as the upstream url, but when you go > there, it says 'Please see our main site at junit.org'. Even an automatic redirect might not be permanent, so I think these should be changed. > Is there a rule that 'www' should be omitted or that it should be included? > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/i686/alsa-lib/ : > http://www.alsa-project.org > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/any/alsa-firmware/ : > http://alsa-project.org/ If both are correct, it does not matter. About here I got bored...