Home | News | Download | Packages | Forum | Wiki | Github

Store user submitted templates on the wiki?

(oliver) #1

I’m just a regular user putting out an idea here :slight_smile:

Anyone think it would be a good idea to keep the user submitted templates on the wiki and have them categorized appropriately? It would easily allow for updates by anyone and be quickly searchable. You could still use the forum to announce it, just link to the wiki article page. Seems like it would be a ‘diet-AUR’

"User-contrib" repo/wiki: Is there one? Should there be?

We don’t want them anyways, we want templates to be added to the repository, the templates here in the forum or in the wiki are a disaster.

(oliver) #3

I appreciate your point but there are some things that wouldn’t pass the quality standards (non-release versions for example) - if they’re out there, I think it would be nice if they were centralized

(Erin) #4

They are, in the repository. Anyone is free to make a template or copy something they see in the forum but these potentially are not correct and could cause issues. Surely better to have fully vetted and maintained templates where they should be, i.e. the repository?


You are right.
I will move all my garbage templates to github soon. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

(oliver) #6

Yeah, the repo is the place for the fully vetted and maintained templates but I was thinking more like situations where someone patches suckless terminal for transparency or i3wm for gaps for example. Or maybe someone wants the git version of something. These would never replace the repo versions so just wondering if they could go somewhere

Not a big deal - just thought I’d put it out there

(Masato the Empty) #7

just my musings… No particular order, one point does not necessarily follow from another…

  • this has come up before.
  • Duncaen’s assessment re: disaster… I’ve a nagging feeling he’s on to something. (I always like how he calls it like he sees it… I can’t pull that off myself) But then this is an internet forum, and how many of those aren’t at least a little disastrous on their own anyway?
  • I don’t think the wiki has a published set of standards, and that’s probably fine since there isn’t a flood of questionable contributors… But I think unofficial templates as well as other build howtos should stay in the forum…
  • A section of the forum perhaps? I think the forum mods/maintainers aren’t terribly enthusiastic about this idea (but I’m just attempting to read minds here, which I am totally unqualified to do)
  • While trusting Duncaen’s opinion on this, I also think along with @Oliver that there are things that don’t need to be officially in Void but nonetheless others might be interested in.
    • My own reasoning may be different: I don’t think Void needs to try and be everything to everyone like a certain other distro that tries to package every piece-of-crap software under the sun…
    • I can’t exactly fault certain other distros. They cater to a userbase, I"m sure. My impression though is that Void’s traditional userbase is composed largely of folks who have no trouble building software from source if the distro doesn’t do it for them.
    • All that, and also the quality/relase standards @Oliver mentioned.
  • I also have this nagging suspicion that all the talk about templates might be giving new users the idea that this is somehow the correct way to build software on Void. I don’t think this would be correct. (Note I’m reading minds again, so refer to my earlier point on that…)
  • I wonder if eyes roll and hair bristles when the letters “AUR” show up (I personally don’t bristle, but I admit the old eyes tend to go back just a little…) Never having used Arch, I’m sure I just don’t know how great it really is. :stuck_out_tongue: Still, with all the talk I’ve seen on the forum comparing Void to the way Arch does things (and often seeming to pine for the Arch way) I also get the nagging feeling that we’re getting quite a few people who are more like systemd refugees and seem not as interested in Void qua Void as they would be in “Arch without systemd.”
    • Funny enough, I don’t think I’ve seen anybody wish Void did things like Debian…
    • Still I’d be dishonest if I said lack of systemd wasn’t one of the things that led me to settle on Void, when Debian no longer felt right to me…

There… Been a little while since I’ve gone on a good ramble. If anybody actually reads this, thanks for humoring me (or sorry I can’t return your wasted minutes if it’s more like that)

(Erin) #8

There is of course no reason why someone cannot set-up their own unofficial website doing so. The forum is also searchable. Maybe the need is moot?


But I would like to beg you, cr6, to not participate in “package requests” on github if you are not then really interested in becoming the mainteiner of those packages!
And I explain why: my last 2 package requests ended in limbo because you just posted your template in the void-packages discussion without then following with a PR…
I imagine that any other interested candidate at this point might think: "…another developer seems to be already involved, I stop from worrying about this request so as not to interfere with the work of my colleague…"
But that colleague, that is’ you’, does not have the slightest interest in following the thing and the package will never come! (I canceled the first of my two requests while the one still open, still quite recent, is ‘jgmenu’)

This is my impression. If anyone can explain to me that it is unfounded, I will apologize for my effrontery.
Said this, cr6: I congratulate you for your enthusiasm, dedication and contributions in general that in any other context outside the ‘package requests’, I also follow with pleasure and appreciate it very much!


@paoloschi Thank you for your effrontery, no problem, your criticism is welcome!
You have to understand that I have minimal experience with github.
All of this is completely new for me and there is, obviously, room for improvement in my workflow, to say the least… :wink:

You’re talking about #6599 and #7004
You are right, now I understand your frustration and I am truly sorry.
I promise to do my very best to change the situation.

I’m okay with maintaining a few packages for Void [if they are accepted].


I am happy that my observation has not offended you and I thank you for this very constructive answer… :1st_place_medal:


jgmenu-0.6.1 has been accepted. :sweat_smile:
[you can close #7004]


what a wonderful cr6 !!! :trophy::trophy::trophy::trophy: :grinning:

[you can close #7004]

Curiously the issue is still in “open” while it is labeled -not by me- as closed (???)
There is no “close” button I can press…


cr6git referenced this issue 4 hours ago
New package: jgmenu #7242

The linked issue is closed, but issue 7004 is still open.

History of the AUR:
In the beginning, there was ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/incoming, and people contributed by simply uploading the PKGBUILD, the needed supplementary files, and the built package itself to the server. The package and associated files remained there until a Package Maintainer saw the program and adopted it.
Then the Trusted User Repositories were born. Certain individuals in the community were allowed to host their own repositories for anyone to use. The AUR expanded on this basis, with the aim of making it both more flexible and more usable. In fact, the AUR maintainers are still referred to as TUs (Trusted Users).

So the current Void system is perhaps in fact like the early AUR but your package templates get built into binaries?

One thing about the AUR concept though is that it has pushed ABS development, and related GUI interfaces, to a very high standard. Part of that is probably due to professional contributions from downstream Arch based distros though.

A Debian - like feature Void has is package splitting, Arch tends not to do this so has simple dependency resolution but larger upgrade download sizes. Debian is also especially good with respect to BASH and Grub, as these are kind of ‘native’ projects there.


OK, I’ve found the HUGE button finally!
My eyes were blurred: today there are 45+ degrees Celsius here and my brain it is melted :sweat:


@paoloschi as you may have noticed, there are a large number of PR in limbo.
Seems like they are stuck in traffic jam…
:turtle: :tractor: :articulated_lorry: :truck: :minibus: :motor_scooter: :red_car: :blue_car: :taxi: :snail:

(Michael Aldridge) #19

This is an old thread and normally I don’t dig these up, but I figured I’d throw in my 2 cents. I am a maintainer and I’m the guy behind most of the day to day infrastructure changes. Some of this is my own opinion and some of it isn’t, you can reason it out well enough.

@oliver The templates in the forum are a disaster zone. One of my first questions is whether or not people have a POS template from the forum installed as they have all the same problems as the AUR. I generally don’t support such systems unless there is a serious issue that has been discovered in some actual Void system which is triggered by the package that is not currently in tree. As far as putting the templates on the Wiki, that will get you banned for spam.

@Erin We check for build and that they don’t break anything else. There is a level of expectation that the maintainers know what they’re doing. The advantage of being in-repo instead of some other place is that then they get A) hosted somewhere, and B) rebuilt for updates when dependencies are updated. As far as other people setting up a website that hosts the templates/separate repo, I think most people dramatically underestimate how much effort that is. It would also be very aggressively discouraged by the Void team, so I personally wouldn’t expect it to get very far.

@masato Yes, hair goes on end, see my earlier comment. The AUR is a disaster zone for reliability and troubleshooting. Arch is, aside from weirdness with pacman, very stable if you use only the base repositories. If people want Arch without systemd, I encourage them to do so, there are a handful of arch derived distributions with do not use systemd as init. Void is Void, its maintained by a very small team, and right now we’re happy with the direction its going.

@paoloschi While I do not recognize you or any commits you might have made, I do recognize cr6git and know that templates bearing that submit ID are generally quite safe to yolomerge. Perhaps you shouldn’t be so quick to disparage people who are working torwards what the goal of the project is? While cr6git may not be maintaining all of the packages submitted, 90% of the battle is submitting them at all. I would say that 85% of the packages in Void are maintained by ~25 people. It takes me 10 minutes to update something versus perhaps a few hours to set it up from scratch.

@cr6 Keep up the good work.

@hralgmir I always appreciate when people bring up history. If you scroll back through long deserted list archives, you’ll find that the AUR was a highly political thing even when it started. Its a unique thing that has to have the culture to support it. Void does not have this culture. I cannot speak to ABS development, but I will certainly agree that Arch’s explosive growth drove a lot of things. One thing that’s important to note is that we also have an informal concept of Trusted Users, in the form of people who over time the core maintainers start to recognize. These are people that if they approve a PR I know I can generally merge it safely. Its not quite the same thing since we have a lot more security than Arch does and our security model is fundamentally incompatible with an AUR model, but these individuals fulfill a similar role.

As far as the large number of PRs in limbo, here’s kind of what’s going on:

A non-trivial number of Void’s core leadership work on a calendar that is roughly pegged to a US academic calendar. This means that since its the start of September, a lot of people are under high load at the moment. Some patience is appreciated and review will start up again at full speed soon, perhaps in about 2 weeks time. We’re also taking a step back from adding more packages right now to evaluate some infrastructure refactors to try and build more packages faster and with less wasted effort.

repo3 was recently rebuilt, this ate almost all of my time for a week. In addition I’ve been cleaning up the mklive system and getting ready to automate the image release process, this takes time and so I haven’t been merging PRs. @Vaelatern has been working with me on some of the infrastructure refactor and so that’s been time that can’t be used for merging things. We’re moving along and PR review is happening, but there are some other things in the queue right now that are way higher priority than just updating and accepting new packages.

There are also some really outdated PRs that we have to keep an eye on to see about changes that might happen. I’m intending to look at running a filter over void-packages and closing ancient PRs and ancient issues to get the number of PRs and Issues to reflect the current state of Void. A 3 year old Issue for gnome is likely no longer relevant and we have too many of those right now. If you know of such ancient PRs/Issues or you own an ancient PR or Issue, please consider closing it or reaching out on IRC directly.

In closing:

Void is not Arch. We do not strive to be, we do not intend to be. The AUR is one of the things that makes Arch special and unique. For us its the unified build system of XBPS and xbps-src. We are built on much the same philosophy of things like NetBSD, Suckless, and some of the security ideals of OpenBSD. We aren’t just a ‘systemd-free’ distro and in fact that’s a side-effect of supporting musl, not necessarily a design choice on ideological grounds (go far enough back in the history and you’ll find that Void booted with systemd, arguably before Arch did; some of the infrastructure is even still around for this).

The goal of Void was never to compete with Arch or to be the next Ubuntu. Its a system that the maintainers like working on because of the way it is designed and because we find it genuinely fun and engaging to work on. I always appreciate when I see people using Void, but Void has a fairly narrow vision, if that vision does not align with what you want to do, I strongly encourage you to check out distrowatch.com and see what else is out there. There’s a lot of amazing distros built up by teams that are just as driven as the team behind Void.

The single least productive things you can do though are try to make Void something it isn’t. It will annoy you because the changes won’t go through. It will annoy the maintainers because you will be decreasing the SnR when there is real work to be done. It will annoy the community because you’ll be that guy who just keeps bringing up the same idea over and over that has already been dismissed.

Thanks for pretending to read my wall of text, if you are curious about any of this or why/how I’ve drawn certain conclusions feel free to ping me on IRC, I’m rarely on the forums.

"User-contrib" repo/wiki: Is there one? Should there be?

I understand Void and philosophy behind better now, thanks! :slight_smile:


Allô cr6, on 8 October jgmenu v0.7 was released.
Are you going to update our package?

(maxice8's favorite salad) #22