From GNUtoo at cyberdimension.org  Mon May  2 14:58:00 2022
From: GNUtoo at cyberdimension.org (Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 16:58:00 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Update on the PKGBUILDs license
In-Reply-To: <20220429002649.6ef3b584@parabola.localdomain>
References: <20220427021332.079d3e33@primary_laptop>
 <20220427024056.22113360@primary_laptop>
 <20220427053835.6mpfplh4qokytexr@arch-kevin>
 <20220428053719.29a9e5fd@parabola.localdomain>
 <20220429002649.6ef3b584@parabola.localdomain>
Message-ID: <20220502165800.62f57257@primarylaptop.localdomain>

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 00:26:49 -0400
bill-auger <bill-auger at peers.community> wrote:
> when i tried this, i noticed that my editor recognized it
> and gives it a special color - that suggest to me that
> these headers are widely known/acceptable these days
> there is a lot of buzz in the libre community about REUSE,
> which favors SPDX - i think we should encourage it
The FSF and GNU tend to favor copyright headers, and Bradley Kuhn
mentioned that SPDX was too limited. 

So I tried to look a bit into it and found out that there are certain
things you can't do like adding exceptions to licenses for instance
(like releasing code under GPLv3+ with an additional permission to link
against GPLv2 libraries). Text written by human enable to do these
things easily.

Though for our use case (PKGBUILDs in Parabola), SPDX looks fine for me
as long as we also keep the README file we have to explain the situation
in more details (because we have CC0 on top of likely not-copyrightable
packages).

As for having the authors like that, the example you chose is not the
best one. Ideally it should be:
> # Copyright (C) 2019,2020 Andreas Grapentin <andreasXgrapentin.org>
> # Copyright (C) 2019,2020,2021 bill-auger <bill-augerXprogrammer.net>
[license]
And then only 1 line with Maintainer, like that:
> # Maintainer: Parabola hackers <this mailing list> 
Or like that:
> # Maintainer: A specific parabola hacker <Mail> 

For the later I would prefer to have Parabola hackers / Parabola
project or something similar as maintainer and to unify that across
all PKGBUILDs we have.

Though I am also hesitant to change that without asking the people
listed in Maintainer, as some might have compelling reasons to add them
as Maintainer instead of the Parabola project.

We could even remove the Maintainer: line and move it in a README
somehow.

In addition, if necessary, below, we can also add a policy/howto
detailing how to do changes the package the case we have special needs
for specific packages. For instance:
- When updating this package you need to do these tests to make sure it
  doesn't break.
- Look at foo branch to see if there are any pending invasive changes
  and please sync with the person who worked on them before making
  invasive changes. For smaller changes (version bump, adding boards),
  you can do it directly.
- Do not do these changes otherwise it'll break in this way.

This way the information is in the file and not necessarily in a
maintainer's brain which might not always be available. And it enables
anybody (including people that are not (yet) Parabola hackers) to
understand how to modify the package instead of having to go through a
single maintainer.

Guix has something like that with the Guix package for instance:
> ;; If you are updating this package because it fails to build, you
> ;; need to actually update it *twice*, as the installer is pointing
> ;; to the N-1 guix package revision.
[guix package definition]

It doesn't say "don't touch, only <maintainer> can modify it".

Similarly they have rules for core packages (in their official
documentation) as in Guix modifying them has way more impact than other
distributions (like Parabola, Trisquel, etc) as in Guix modifying them
require to rebuild almost everything due to the way Guix works.

Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20220502/226e501c/attachment.sig>

From bill-auger at peers.community  Tue May  3 02:15:17 2022
From: bill-auger at peers.community (bill-auger)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 22:15:17 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Update on the PKGBUILDs license
In-Reply-To: <20220502165800.62f57257@primarylaptop.localdomain>
References: <20220427021332.079d3e33@primary_laptop>
 <20220427024056.22113360@primary_laptop>
 <20220427053835.6mpfplh4qokytexr@arch-kevin>
 <20220428053719.29a9e5fd@parabola.localdomain>
 <20220429002649.6ef3b584@parabola.localdomain>
 <20220502165800.62f57257@primarylaptop.localdomain>
Message-ID: <20220502221517.0150cb96@parabola.localdomain>

On Mon, 2 May 2022 16:58:00 +0200 Denis wrote:
> And then only 1 line with Maintainer, like that:
> > # Maintainer: Parabola hackers <this mailing list>
> Or like that:
> > # Maintainer: A specific parabola hacker <Mail>   

i agree; but that would be a more significant break from the
arch-like convention - it would complicate the diff/merging of
most PKGBUILDs - i prefer to keep diffs as minimal as possible -
to have only one Maintainer line, would eliminate the helpful
hints "# Maintainer (arch):" which indicate where to find the
upstream PKGBUILD to merge against


On Mon, 2 May 2022 16:58:00 +0200 Denis wrote:
> some might have compelling reasons to add them
> as Maintainer instead of the Parabola project.

the most compelling reason, is that some PKGBUILDs are maintained
by users - the Maintainer email address, exists for bug
reporting - that would only work if we required all packagers to
read the mailing list - i think that everyone in the keyring
should be required to read the mailing list; but i dont think
that was ever made as a matter of policy

that is worth considering - i could be convinced to make it
policy; but based on the response to this thread so far, that
would entail removing most of the people in the keyring now

this is quite an important issue - i am somewhat discouraged
that no one has acknowledged my proposal to arch to fix this
issue upstream - if people are not paying attention to parabola
and/or actively contributing; we should consider retiring them -
i think at the bare minimum, devs should be participating in
important discussions, in order to remain on the "active" roster

over-all this is a step in the right direction - i have several
other house-cleaning proposal in mind - one of them is related to
the Maintainers and Contributors


> It doesn't say "don't touch, only <maintainer> can modify it".

that is certainly in accordance with adhocracy; but in practice,
some PKGBUILD maintainers complain when others modify the
PKGBUILD significantly - i have only intervened in cases where
the package in the repos is broken, _and_ users complain
repeatedly, _and_ the maintainer does not respond to the bug
reports - that really should not happen; but it does

furthermore, i really should not wait so long for the maintainer
to respond; but i do, out of courtesy - IMHO, one valid
complaint against an important package should be enough to
prioritize it; and more than a week with no acknowledgment from
the maintainer is unacceptable - thats not to say that the bug
must be fixed within a week; but the maintainer should
acknowledge that the bug report exists, explaining if it will
not be fixed promptly, and why, or asking that someone else
should do it this time, if time is an issue, temporarily

checking your email is easy - if a maintainer leaves a bug
report open with no acknowledgement for more than a month; that
suggests retiring that person from the "active" list; then
demoting the package to "team-maintained" - it is very easy to
add people back when they do have sufficient time to be
considered as "active" - in the real world that person would be
reprimanded or fired

that was perhaps drifting off-topic somewhat; but adhocracy
should not excluded professionalism - there is much we could
improve in that way; and i am sufficiently motivated recently, to
start making such uncomfortable policy changes

From bill-auger at peers.community  Tue May  3 02:23:31 2022
From: bill-auger at peers.community (bill-auger)
Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 22:23:31 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Update on the PKGBUILDs license
In-Reply-To: <20220502165800.62f57257@primarylaptop.localdomain>
References: <20220427021332.079d3e33@primary_laptop>
 <20220427024056.22113360@primary_laptop>
 <20220427053835.6mpfplh4qokytexr@arch-kevin>
 <20220428053719.29a9e5fd@parabola.localdomain>
 <20220429002649.6ef3b584@parabola.localdomain>
 <20220502165800.62f57257@primarylaptop.localdomain>
Message-ID: <20220502222331.7fb037cc@parabola.localdomain>

my previous post could be could be summarized like so:

the issue of "who is credited in the PKGBUILD?" is relatively
minor

the issue of "is this package _actually_ well-maintained?" is
much more important

a package with one dedicated maintainer should indicate that the
package is better maintained than a "team-maintained" package

i am not against the idea of all PKGBUILDs being denoted as
"team-maintained"; but in that case, the "Maintainer" line is
irrelevant information to include in the PKGBUILD - its just
noise, with no value

From nobody at parabola.nu  Tue May  3 23:55:10 2022
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 23:55:10 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [iceweasel] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20220503235510.3710385.97308@winston.parabola.nu>

eliotreyna at disroot.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* iceweasel 1:99.0.1-1.parabola1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel/
* iceweasel 1:99.0.1-1.parabola1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel/


The user provided the following additional text:

Firefox source code has been updated to the version 100.

The following changes has been applied to this new version:

1.- Subtitle support in Picture-in-picture mode for HTML5 players.
2.- Language pack matching according to the localization of the OS.
3.- Enhanced support of Firefox spell checking function.
4.- Aesthetic changes applied to the scrollbars for Linux.

For more information, please follow the link below:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/100.0/releasenotes/

Thanks.


From GNUtoo at cyberdimension.org  Wed May  4 00:01:20 2022
From: GNUtoo at cyberdimension.org (Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli)
Date: Wed, 4 May 2022 02:01:20 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Copyright status of the PKGBUILDs you worked on in abslibre
Message-ID: <20220504020120.644ade3c@primarylaptop.localdomain>

Hi,

Recently we started working on clarifying the license situation with
the PKGBUILDs in abslibre. Many PKGBUILDs are probably not copyrightable
but to avoid any uncertainty several Parabola contributors already
relicensed their contributions to the packages under the CC0 license.

Are you OK for licensing your work on packages under the CC0 licenses?

Since you appear to have written several PKGBUILDs from scratch
(specially the ones related to Java support in Parabola), it would
allow to add licenses headers on them and on PKGBUILDs derived from
them.

PS: As for the patches they are typically under the same licenses than
    the upstream projects, so we don't need to do anything special here.

PPS: I've added the Parabola mailing list in CC so your response could
     be archived publicly, and other people could also comment on this
     mail if needed.

Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20220504/c5d8e1dc/attachment.sig>

From GNUtoo at cyberdimension.org  Wed May  4 01:13:44 2022
From: GNUtoo at cyberdimension.org (Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli)
Date: Wed, 4 May 2022 03:13:44 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Update on the PKGBUILDs license
In-Reply-To: <20220502221517.0150cb96@parabola.localdomain>
References: <20220427021332.079d3e33@primary_laptop>
 <20220427024056.22113360@primary_laptop>
 <20220427053835.6mpfplh4qokytexr@arch-kevin>
 <20220428053719.29a9e5fd@parabola.localdomain>
 <20220429002649.6ef3b584@parabola.localdomain>
 <20220502165800.62f57257@primarylaptop.localdomain>
 <20220502221517.0150cb96@parabola.localdomain>
Message-ID: <20220504031344.4de076bc@primarylaptop.localdomain>

On Mon, 2 May 2022 22:15:17 -0400
bill-auger <bill-auger at peers.community> wrote:

> On Mon, 2 May 2022 16:58:00 +0200 Denis wrote:
> > And then only 1 line with Maintainer, like that:  
> > > # Maintainer: Parabola hackers <this mailing list>  
> > Or like that:  
> > > # Maintainer: A specific parabola hacker <Mail>     
> 
> i agree; but that would be a more significant break from the
> arch-like convention - it would complicate the diff/merging of
> most PKGBUILDs - i prefer to keep diffs as minimal as possible -
> to have only one Maintainer line, would eliminate the helpful
> hints "# Maintainer (arch):" which indicate where to find the
> upstream PKGBUILD to merge against
Do you have some workflow that would be broken from that? 

Personally I use meld for diffing PKGBUILDS and it doesn't create any
issues.

And if I need older PKGBUILDs to compare with I can get them with the
following method:
(1) I use git log to find the revision I'm interested in
(2) I use that revision to get the file hash like that:
    git ls-tree <revision> -- repo/package-name/PKGBUILD
(3) I then can get the file with the following command
    git show <hash> > PKGBUILD.old

Typically minimizing the diff that far is really important with
workflows that require to rebase on top of an upstream tree because it
avoids merge conflicts and enables automatic merges instead. So it
saves a lot of time.

But as I understand here doing that kind of workflows is not possible
with the current structure we have, though I could be wrong or it could
be something planned.

> On Mon, 2 May 2022 16:58:00 +0200 Denis wrote:
> > some might have compelling reasons to add them
> > as Maintainer instead of the Parabola project.  
> 
> the most compelling reason, is that some PKGBUILDs are maintained
> by users - the Maintainer email address, exists for bug
> reporting - that would only work if we required all packagers to
> read the mailing list - i think that everyone in the keyring
> should be required to read the mailing list; but i dont think
> that was ever made as a matter of policy
I don't see the point here, the git history typically have the
information on who touches the file. So we have the email of the people
involved anyway, even if they forget to add the headers and so on.

If we have a line about Maintainers it should probably tell something
that the git history isn't telling.

Though that requires either people who are not official Parabola
hackers yet to send patches made with git format-patch or to
have people who merge that contribution to use --author when doing the
patch. But information on who touched the file can also be added in the
copyright headers anyway. In Guix every single person who touch a file
is supposed to add pers copyright header in that file. This simplifies
things a lot. 

In our case we could strongly require it for people that are not making
patches, and try to do it for people making patches that already have
the proper attribution because otherwise that information could be
completely missing or completely lost.

Anyway with copyright headers, having all the information there is also
useful in case people copy the PKGBUILD in other projects (like Aur for
instance) without the git history.

In that case the copyright information is kept in the new project which
is the way it's supposed to be done anyway, and it enables easier
sharing back and forth between several projects.

> the most compelling reason, is that some PKGBUILDs are maintained
> by users - the Maintainer email address, exists for bug
> reporting
[...]
> > It doesn't say "don't touch, only <maintainer> can modify it".  
> 
> that is certainly in accordance with adhocracy; but in practice,
> some PKGBUILD maintainers complain when others modify the
> PKGBUILD significantly - i have only intervened in cases where
> the package in the repos is broken, _and_ users complain
> repeatedly, _and_ the maintainer does not respond to the bug
> reports - that really should not happen; but it does

And as I understand having a single person listed as maintainer means
that this person has some sort of authority over the packages and that
all the patches should go through that person and that at least other
people can't touch this package without that person's permission.

So if we add all the Parabola hackers as collective maintainers I
don't have any issue with that anymore because anyone included in that
collective can do modifications, review patches and so on.

This is more or less how it works with projects like Linux, u-boot,
Barebox and so on that have a MAINTAINER file with people listed as
maintainers inside that file. But nothing in these projects subsystems
(like DRM, sound, etc) from adding many maintainers and having
collective maintainership.

The issue I have here is that if there is a single maintainer, I think
it really needs to reflect the reality as it does push people not to do
anything or to send patch to that maintainer or not to touch the
package without the maintainer authorization.

I've only found that to be the with packages maintained by David P. /
megver83, and also for very short period of time for 1 package
I worked on as I had to finish work on a huge changes which then
made it way easier for anyone contribute to it later on.

As for if it's a good thing or not to have single maintainers If that
works for the person working on the package and for Parabola in general
I don't have any objections but it's not something to be taken lightly
so the default should rather be to have collective maintainership and
stating that in the header.

An issue slightly related to that would also be to think about long
term maintenance of packages. For instance if someone adds a package
and is then unable to maintain it and that users started to depend on
that it's not ideal. In another hand if users that want to use FSDG
compliant distributions cannot because the packages they depend on is
missing, it's not a good thing either.

An idea would be to give less guarantees on some repositories like PCR,
but that would also lead users to think that there is more guarantees
in libre for instance.

An issue with that is that some Arch Linux policies are probably far
from ideal, as in practice some Arch Linux packages for software that
is free software are not built from source. We can find list of
packages (that are known to be) affected by that in the blacklist
repository.

Java started to be way more problematic than before for instance as
the maven build system typically uses maven central, and in maven
central there are many "artifacts" without source code, with incomplete
source code, etc, so it's really a mess.

Some go packages also bundle a lot of dependency so knowing the license
is often a lot of work.

Since we are fixing that in Parabola (at least for Java), we could try
to upstream some of our work (and with the proper copyright headers it
could push Arch to adopt free licenses to clarify the copyright
situation).

> checking your email is easy - if a maintainer leaves a bug
> report open with no acknowledgement for more than a month; that
> suggests retiring that person from the "active" list;
>
>  then
> demoting the package to "team-maintained" - it is very easy to
> add people back when they do have sufficient time to be
> considered as "active" - in the real world that person would be
> reprimanded or fired
If that only affects "maintained" packages I'm OK with that. This way
if some people go on long holidays for some reasons, they would still
be Parabola hackers when they come back but their packages could be
maintained by other people in the meant time.

This also brings to knowledge again here: if that happens it would be
good to have at least some recommendations inside the PKGBUILD about
what to do or not to do for these new (temporary) maintainers. Else the
maintainer who is gone on holidays would find pers package completely
modified in the wrong way (according to that maintainer).

And in some cases we need to fix things fast anyway due to security
issues so packages also need to be buildable and fixable easily to not
to have to work on them the night in a hurry and burn out.
 
> that was perhaps drifting off-topic somewhat; but adhocracy
> should not excluded professionalism - there is much we could
> improve in that way; and i am sufficiently motivated recently, to
> start making such uncomfortable policy changes
For professionalism, I think the way to go is to pick up the parts that
are useful to us but not necessarily everything as some parts can
strongly limit volunteer based projects. And the useful parts can also
come from direct needs.

For instance clarifying things is good as it really helps contributors
and users. Respecting other humans is also something really important.

In both case we don't necessarily need to copy the industry to find
that out, and by doing it our way we also have the potential to do it
way better too. Though we need to be careful not to do it worse.

Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20220504/4ac52be7/attachment.sig>

From ovruni at gnu.org.pe  Fri May  6 19:04:41 2022
From: ovruni at gnu.org.pe (ovruni at gnu.org.pe)
Date: Fri, 06 May 2022 14:04:41 -0500
Subject: [Dev] Copyright status of the PKGBUILDs you worked on in
 abslibre
In-Reply-To: <20220504020120.644ade3c@primarylaptop.localdomain>
References: <20220504020120.644ade3c@primarylaptop.localdomain>
Message-ID: <1e6ab8c7928c1d6548240a5a8e785952@gnu.org.pe>

El 2022-05-03 19:01, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli escribi?:
> Hi,
> 
> Recently we started working on clarifying the license situation with
> the PKGBUILDs in abslibre. Many PKGBUILDs are probably not 
> copyrightable
> but to avoid any uncertainty several Parabola contributors already
> relicensed their contributions to the packages under the CC0 license.
> 
> Are you OK for licensing your work on packages under the CC0 licenses?

I agree with this

> 
> Since you appear to have written several PKGBUILDs from scratch
> (specially the ones related to Java support in Parabola), it would
> allow to add licenses headers on them and on PKGBUILDs derived from
> them.
> 
> PS: As for the patches they are typically under the same licenses than
>     the upstream projects, so we don't need to do anything special 
> here.
> 
> PPS: I've added the Parabola mailing list in CC so your response could
>      be archived publicly, and other people could also comment on this
>      mail if needed.
> 
> Denis.

From pagure at pagure.io  Fri May  6 19:04:47 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Fri,  6 May 2022 19:04:47 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2343=3A_Updated_Okular_packag?=
 =?utf-8?q?e?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-c0529f7210c04e6abeb5bed0e639154e@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
Updated Okular package
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/43

From pagure at pagure.io  Fri May  6 19:34:10 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Fri,  6 May 2022 19:34:10 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2344=3A_updpkg=3A_nonprism/da?=
 =?utf-8?q?rktable_3=2E8=2E1-1?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-c040526216aa4f7da208c1a15f037e6e@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: nonprism/darktable 3.8.1-1
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/44

From pagure at pagure.io  Fri May  6 20:28:31 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Fri,  6 May 2022 20:28:31 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2345=3A_updpkg=3A_libre/mplay?=
 =?utf-8?q?er_38364-1?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-0c2bd570c96c4c55aabef997dd0fcf08@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: libre/mplayer 38364-1
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/45

From pagure at pagure.io  Sat May  7 12:37:33 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sat,  7 May 2022 12:37:33 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2346=3A_updpkg=3A_libre/openm?=
 =?utf-8?q?w_0=2E47=2E0_=26_dependencies?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-2c1470fb74d5480ca71309dca178ee6f@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: libre/openmw 0.47.0 & dependencies
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/46

From pagure at pagure.io  Sat May  7 20:49:33 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sat,  7 May 2022 20:49:33 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2347=3A_updpkg=3A_libre/blend?=
 =?utf-8?q?er_3=2E1=2E2?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-5e1acb99d376438aa4b5248557fa56ac@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: libre/blender 3.1.2
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/47

From pagure at pagure.io  Sun May  8 16:59:46 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sun,  8 May 2022 16:59:46 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2348=3A_patch=3A_update_conso?=
 =?utf-8?q?lefonts_documentation?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-1f353155d5fa4873915e261febf63209@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
patch: update consolefonts documentation
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/48

From pagure at pagure.io  Sun May  8 18:35:11 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sun,  8 May 2022 18:35:11 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2349=3A_patch=3A_removed_obso?=
 =?utf-8?q?lete_dependency?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-9709030252d1482d8b66a6712b5aeb76@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
patch: removed obsolete dependency
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/49

From pagure at pagure.io  Sun May 15 11:28:46 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?Grizzly_User?=)
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 11:28:46 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2342=3A_libre/iceweasel=3A_Up?=
 =?utf-8?q?date_to_99=2E0_according_to_upstream_changes?=
In-Reply-To: <abslibre-pull-request-8c3bc5a3587d4d0eb5f28d597f99491a@pagure.io>
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-8c3bc5a3587d4d0eb5f28d597f99491a/close/1652614126.0@pagure.io>


grizzlyuser closed without merging a pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you
are following.

Closed pull-request:

``
libre/iceweasel: Update to 99.0 according to upstream changes
``

https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/42

From pagure at pagure.io  Sun May 15 11:33:35 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?Grizzly_User?=)
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 11:33:35 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2350=3A_libre/iceweasel=3A_Up?=
 =?utf-8?q?date_to_100=2E0=2C_upstream_changes?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-4ae25e0c757f43298a777a52dc4de67f@pagure.io>


grizzlyuser opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
libre/iceweasel: Update to 100.0, upstream changes
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/50

From pagure at pagure.io  Mon May 16 06:32:03 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 06:32:03 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2351=3A_updpkg=3A_libre/openc?=
 =?utf-8?q?v_4=2E5=2E5?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-397d61fc3392491c87c1f516d693441e@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: libre/opencv 4.5.5
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/51

From pagure at pagure.io  Mon May 16 08:58:53 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 08:58:53 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2351=3A_updpkg=3A_libre/openc?=
 =?utf-8?q?v_4=2E5=2E5?=
In-Reply-To: <abslibre-pull-request-397d61fc3392491c87c1f516d693441e@pagure.io>
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-397d61fc3392491c87c1f516d693441e-171243@pagure.io>


morris commented on the pull-request: `updpkg: libre/opencv 4.5.5` that you are following:
``
Still in progress, see [issue #3107](https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/3107) 
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/51

From pagure at pagure.io  Mon May 16 18:14:21 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?bill-auger?=)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 18:14:21 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2350=3A_libre/iceweasel=3A_Up?=
 =?utf-8?q?date_to_100=2E0=2C_upstream_changes?=
In-Reply-To: <abslibre-pull-request-4ae25e0c757f43298a777a52dc4de67f@pagure.io>
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-4ae25e0c757f43298a777a52dc4de67f-171294@pagure.io>


billauger commented on the pull-request: `libre/iceweasel: Update to 100.0, upstream changes` that you are following:
``
merged
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/50

From pagure at pagure.io  Mon May 16 18:15:06 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?bill-auger?=)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 18:15:06 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2350=3A_libre/iceweasel=3A_Up?=
 =?utf-8?q?date_to_100=2E0=2C_upstream_changes?=
In-Reply-To: <abslibre-pull-request-4ae25e0c757f43298a777a52dc4de67f@pagure.io>
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-4ae25e0c757f43298a777a52dc4de67f/close/1652724906.0@pagure.io>


billauger closed without merging a pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you
are following.

Closed pull-request:

``
libre/iceweasel: Update to 100.0, upstream changes
``

https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/50

From pagure at pagure.io  Mon May 16 21:21:31 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 21:21:31 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2352=3A_updpkg=3A_libre/bogof?=
 =?utf-8?q?ilter_1=2E2=2E5?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-14633b66c5aa41fa9d6fe8e8768c3269@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: libre/bogofilter 1.2.5
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/52

From nobody at parabola.nu  Tue May 17 07:37:58 2022
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 07:37:58 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [qt5-styleplugins] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20220517073758.3710382.463@winston.parabola.nu>

leopold at fajtak.at wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* qt5-styleplugins 5.0.0.20170311-34 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/qt5-styleplugins/
* qt5-styleplugins 5.0.0.20170311-33 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/qt5-styleplugins/
* qt5-styleplugins-debug 5.0.0.20170311-34 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/qt5-styleplugins-debug/


The user provided the following additional text:

qt5-base 5.15.4+kde+r139-1 has been released and has a conflict with the most recent version of this package.


From nobody at parabola.nu  Tue May 17 12:51:56 2022
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 12:51:56 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Pcr-Testing package [anki-ccbc] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20220517125156.3710382.94452@winston.parabola.nu>

anarbre at anche.no wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:




The user provided the following additional text:

There is a version 0.2.0 available now.


From nobody at parabola.nu  Thu May 19 04:35:50 2022
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 04:35:50 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [iceweasel] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20220519043550.3710385.46868@winston.parabola.nu>

eliotreyna at disroot.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* iceweasel 1:100.0-1.parabola1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel/
* iceweasel 1:100.0-1.parabola1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel/


The user provided the following additional text:

Firefox source code has been updated to the version 100.0.1.

The main bugfixes are focused into commands for picture-in-picture mode.

For more information, please follow the link below: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/100.0.1/releasenotes/

Thanks.


From pagure at pagure.io  Thu May 19 20:57:53 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 20:57:53 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2353=3A_OpenRC_Init_Script_Re?=
 =?utf-8?q?packaging?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-f11c56844dff43b4992503eb7cb652f2@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
OpenRC Init Script Repackaging
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/53

From megver83 at hyperbola.info  Thu May 19 21:14:24 2022
From: megver83 at hyperbola.info (Megver83)
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 17:14:24 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [abslibre] PR #53: OpenRC Init Script Repackaging
In-Reply-To: <abslibre-pull-request-f11c56844dff43b4992503eb7cb652f2@pagure.io>
References: <abslibre-pull-request-f11c56844dff43b4992503eb7cb652f2@pagure.io>
Message-ID: <1bc0c997-f2e6-7788-98a4-faccbfb7b9e2@hyperbola.info>

You forgot to add pkgrel+=.nonsystemd1 to all PKGBUILDs
Anyways, don't bother on drastically copy-pasting lot of PKGBUILDs from 
Artix, I'll be adding them as I build them.

El 19-05-22 a las 16:57, morris zuss escribi?:
> 
> morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
> ``
> OpenRC Init Script Repackaging
> ``
> 
> To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
> https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/53
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

From morris at vlen.org  Thu May 19 22:04:10 2022
From: morris at vlen.org (Morris Zuss)
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 22:04:10 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Dev] [abslibre] PR #53: OpenRC Init Script Repackaging
In-Reply-To: <1bc0c997-f2e6-7788-98a4-faccbfb7b9e2@hyperbola.info>
References: <abslibre-pull-request-f11c56844dff43b4992503eb7cb652f2@pagure.io>
 <1bc0c997-f2e6-7788-98a4-faccbfb7b9e2@hyperbola.info>
Message-ID: <db5bbbcc-b94f-4447-807f-ef38dd973bf9@vlen.org>

19 May 2022 22:14:41 Megver83 <megver83 at hyperbola.info>:

> You forgot to add pkgrel+=.nonsystemd1 to all PKGBUILDs

I'll add that in tomorrow then. I had forgotten to do so.

> Anyways, don't bother on drastically copy-pasting lot of PKGBUILDs from Artix, I'll be adding them as I build them.

I've tested and changed them all as I go along. There's only two that don't start but that's because the user needs to create config files (dovecot, git, from what I remember)
If there's a particular reason not to use the Artix PKGBUILDs then I'll pass on doing the rest if you wish.

From pagure at pagure.io  Sat May 21 18:50:26 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 18:50:26 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2354=3A_updpkg=3A_nonprism/bi?=
 =?utf-8?q?tlbee_3=2E6?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-803984c97dd54aebb37538782d4fe565@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: nonprism/bitlbee 3.6
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/54

From pagure at pagure.io  Sat May 21 19:43:20 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 19:43:20 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2355=3A_updpkg=3A_nonsystemd/?=
 =?utf-8?q?brltty_6=2E4?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-dc2b360d56914977bca7bb7ff1958c79@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: nonsystemd/brltty 6.4
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/55

From pagure at pagure.io  Sat May 21 20:05:51 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 20:05:51 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2356=3A_updpkg=3A_pcr/laptop-?=
 =?utf-8?q?mode-tools_1=2E74?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-fd6a470b39a54422a6bd05e734c85b7a@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: pcr/laptop-mode-tools 1.74
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/56

From pagure at pagure.io  Sun May 22 15:11:28 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?morris_zuss?=)
Date: Sun, 22 May 2022 15:11:28 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2357=3A_updpkg=3A_nonsystemd/?=
 =?utf-8?q?openrc_inetutils_dependency?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-0c54dcf81e294ef1b5b9ca4d27a9ddab@pagure.io>


morris opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
updpkg: nonsystemd/openrc inetutils dependency
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/57

From nobody at parabola.nu  Thu May 26 13:49:30 2022
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 13:49:30 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre-lts] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20220526134930.3710385.66909@winston.parabola.nu>

jesus.frp.97 at gmail.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* linux-libre-lts 5.15.41-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-lts/
* linux-libre-lts 5.15.41-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-lts/
* linux-libre-lts 5.15.41-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-lts/
* linux-libre-lts-docs 5.15.41-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-lts-docs/
* linux-libre-lts-docs 5.15.41-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-lts-docs/
* linux-libre-lts-headers 5.15.41-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-lts-headers/
* linux-libre-lts-headers 5.15.41-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-lts-headers/
* linux-libre-lts-headers 5.15.41-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-lts-headers/


The user provided the following additional text:

Linux-libre-lts 5.15.41-1 [libre] (armv7h)



From nobody at parabola.nu  Fri May 27 20:41:42 2022
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 20:41:42 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Pcr package [i2p] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20220527204142.3710385.9498@winston.parabola.nu>

cyberdevilnl at protonmail.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* i2p 1.7.0-1 [pcr] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/armv7h/i2p/
* i2p 1.7.0-1 [pcr] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/i686/i2p/
* i2p 1.7.0-1 [pcr] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/x86_64/i2p/


The user provided the following additional text:

Version 1.8.0 has been released.


From pagure at pagure.io  Tue May 31 18:17:54 2022
From: pagure at pagure.io (=?utf-8?q?Grizzly_User?=)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 18:17:54 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?=5Babslibre=5D_PR_=2358=3A_libre/iceweasel_101?=
 =?utf-8?q?=2E0?=
Message-ID: <abslibre-pull-request-02e9b532c68d418b8f53d1058df80d60@pagure.io>


grizzlyuser opened a new pull-request against the project: `abslibre` that you are following:
``
libre/iceweasel 101.0
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/abslibre/pull-request/58