AUR web interface

Tasklist

FS#2888 - Package Screening System

Attached to Project: AUR web interface
Opened by Simo Leone (neotuli) - Monday, 27 June 2005, 19:30 GMT
Last edited by Simo Leone (neotuli) - Friday, 01 July 2005, 22:32 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Backend
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version 1.1
Due in Version 2.0.0
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 0%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

This task is a reminder about a possible package screening system where all packages are marked "unchecked" as they enter unsupported, or are updated. After a TU checks over the package (perhaps doing a non-committed test build) they can mark it "clean", or advise the contributor as the the problems with their package.
(application/octet-stream)    aur-flagsafe.diff (5.7 KiB)
(application/octet-stream)    aur-flagsafe-v2.diff (9.1 KiB)
This task depends upon

Closed by  Paul Mattal (paul)
Friday, 29 July 2005, 12:33 GMT
Reason for closing:  Implemented
Additional comments about closing:  Applied the v2 patch along with turning package names green in list when they're safe.
Comment by Jaroslaw Swierczynski (swiergot) - Friday, 01 July 2005, 20:02 GMT
I already sent the patch to Paul a few days ago but since today I found this task, I'm attaching it here officially.
Comment by Simo Leone (neotuli) - Friday, 01 July 2005, 22:31 GMT
Paul is busy off his butt right now, but I'll take a look at it.

I know at the meeting we discussed this, IMHO we should do a quick and dirty implementation for 1.X (which I'm going to assume your patch does..since I haven't read it yet), see how it works out, make ajustments and "do it right" (tm) for 2.X .

For that reason, I'm also modifying this to be due for 2.0, although we'll certainly be messing with it before then.

EDIT: one more thing, maybe we should talk to the TUs before slapping this into effect, I'd like to get a feel for what they thing as a whole.
Comment by Jaroslaw Swierczynski (swiergot) - Saturday, 02 July 2005, 12:31 GMT
Well, If I didn't miss anything, I think my patch does it exactly as we discussed, at least according to my interpretation. Surely it will need adjustments.
I have added a new item to the agenda for the next meeting regarding this.

PS. I forgot to include this:

ALTER TABLE Packages ADD Safe TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED DEFAULT 0;
ALTER TABLE Packages ADD INDEX(Safe);
Comment by Jaroslaw Swierczynski (swiergot) - Monday, 18 July 2005, 16:03 GMT
I have uploaded an updated version of the patch that now reflects suggestions from phrakture.

Loading...