AUR web interface

Tasklist

FS#34694 - Online editor for PKGUBILDs

Attached to Project: AUR web interface
Opened by (Det) - Monday, 08 April 2013, 23:55 GMT
Last edited by Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer) - Saturday, 04 May 2013, 11:35 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Backend
Status Closed
Assigned To canyonknight (canyonknight)
Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 2.0.1
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

So that you _don't_ have to 1) download/extract the tarball, 2) edit it, 3) tar it up, 4) upload it, and then finally 5) remove the leftovers. It also wouldn't matter, if you we're on Windows, which screws up your file permissions, indentations, etc.

Should be immune to "ZIP bombs"[1] as well, if you could touch just the PKGBUILD.

Then of course, if not a backup, then at least a button that would ask "Are you sure?" after you press *Done.* would be nice.

The same checks from when uploading the package would obviously be required (pkgname exists, pkgver's a number, etc.)

[1] = https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2011-February/013746.html
This task depends upon

Closed by  Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer)
Saturday, 04 May 2013, 11:35 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Additional comments about closing:  All source packages should be tested before submitting.
Comment by (Det) - Tuesday, 09 April 2013, 00:05 GMT
Uhh.. this wasn't supposed to be a bug report.. why can't I change that?
Comment by canyonknight (canyonknight) - Thursday, 11 April 2013, 21:30 GMT
I'm a firm believer that all source packages uploaded to the AUR should be built by the maintainer and verified to be working prior to upload. If someone edits a PKGBUILD online they wouldn't be able to do that verification.
Comment by (Det) - Thursday, 11 April 2013, 22:36 GMT
That's true. There should be a notification that it's still preferred to test your changes with "makepkg -S" (--source).
Comment by KaiSforza (KaiSforza) - Thursday, 11 April 2013, 22:45 GMT
I do not think this should even be considered. I have seen my fair share of packages that don't get tested even without this. Use something like cower and burp if going to the AUR is a hassle.

And yes, if you can't test it, it shouldn't be edited.
Comment by (Det) - Wednesday, 17 April 2013, 14:20 GMT
canyonknight, Lukas, what do you think?

I'm fine with this being closed as I've already gotten used to the whole cower/edit/tar/burp/remove sequence (got a script for this), but it's still a neat feature.
Comment by Lukas Fleischer (lfleischer) - Saturday, 04 May 2013, 11:34 GMT
I don't like it for the same reasons that canyonknight and William already mentioned.

Loading...