[Slackbuilds-users] duplicity & tarsnap

Matteo Bernardini matteo.bernardini at gmail.com
Thu Jan 23 17:43:15 UTC 2014

2014/1/23 Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond at acadiau.ca>:
> I'm new on this list, so sorry if this has been discussed and
> definitively rejected as unworkable or abhorrent, but I am wondering
> if updates really need to go through a person who has committed to
> being the maintainer, and if every SlackBuild really needs an official
> maintainer.

well, IMHO yes and yes.

> For example, suppose there was a section of the web site where schmoes
> such as me could submit a new SlackBuild, the link for the new source,
> the .info file, ...  Then, the registered maintainer, or some
> respected/privileged volunteer, whenever they get around to it, could
> take a "quick" look to ensure that the submitter hasn't done anything
> odd, and, if not, push the updates through.  (If the schmoe changed
> things significantly, that would of course require a careful look by
> someone.  But if the change is a simple version upgrade, that should
> be quick to pass judgement upon.)

the problem is that nobody can ensure that the interested SlackBuild
works after the upgrade: that's why is preferable that the maintainer
actually use that piece of sotfware (so he can fix it in case it
breaks for whatever reason).
also the maintainer can have different plans for it, or he knows that
the update might break another thing, and so on...

> It might be nicer to have dedicated maintainers for each package, but
> if that is an issue (and it seems to be a bit of an issue), this might
> be preferable to abandoning the SlackBuild entirely.

well, as far as I remember it has never been an issue...

>> Unmaintained scripts do eventually get removed when a new Slackware is
>> released, and the script doesn't work on it, and nobody in the community
>> notices & fixes it. However this takes a long time... and it's arguably
>> better to have a stale SlackBuild than none at all.
> Would it make sense to put these removed scripts in an "orphaned
> and/or broken SlackBuilds" page on the web site, so that people
> interested in that package might be able to get a running start on
> creating a working SlackBuilds for some package of interest to them?

anybody interested can already get previous versions from our git
(also searching for the interested slackbuild in the cgit form).


More information about the SlackBuilds-users mailing list