Package Details: gnome-chatty 0.8.2-3

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/gnome-chatty.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: gnome-chatty
Description: XMPP and SMS messaging via libpurple and ModemManager
Upstream URL: https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/Chatty
Licenses: GPL3
Submitter: None
Maintainer: julianfairfax (genofire, dos1)
Last Packager: None
Votes: 5
Popularity: 0.004590
First Submitted: 2024-03-30 07:53 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-03-30 19:38 (UTC)

Latest Comments

1 2 Next › Last »

MarsSeed commented on 2024-04-04 09:25 (UTC)

I have observed the lack of 'Last Login' field on several users' account pages, but I have no way of telling if they were suspended.

My suspicion is that after some long period of time of not logging in, the field gets hidden even if the account is not suspended. But in any case, if the last login entry is missing, it strongly hints at lack of use of that account, for any reason.

MarsSeed commented on 2024-04-04 09:18 (UTC)

Anyway, listing him in PKGBUILD as # Contributor is sufficient for crediting his former work on the purism-chatty package.

<deleted-account> commented on 2024-04-04 09:10 (UTC)

Alright, you've convinced me :)

I've removed truocolo from the maintainers list. I also removed lafleur since I haven't seen any activity from them and they seem to also be suspended (no last logged in date showing in the profile page).

MarsSeed commented on 2024-04-04 09:03 (UTC)

You are right in your observation: AUR does not show suspended status on account pages.

What you can notice, though, is neither @tallero's nor @truocolo's page has a Last Login: entry. That field is not something that the user can configure to hide.

Previously @tallero's last login was showing a date from 2024-03, and @truocolo's was either in Jan or Feb 2024.

So in his case, this entry is not hidden because of long inactivity, but rather the suspended state of the account.

(And the 'Status: Active' field is misleading. It only means the account was not switched to the 'Inactive' status. That is a user choice, and it does not prevent login. In case of a suspension, though, the publicly visible status remains 'Active', but the user cannot login, and upon login attempt, they get an error message saying the account is suspended.)

You can inquire PM's if you feel like it, though I don't think it's necessary. You can decide to keep or remove Pellegrino Prevete's accounts as co-maintainers. As long as the account is suspended, he cannot push changes.

But my advice is to remove him from the co-maintainers' list. If he ever gets reinstated and wants to co-maintain this, he can ask for it here in the comments, and you can decide about the question then. (Though in any case the package has more than enough co-maintainers in my personal opinion.)

<deleted-account> commented on 2024-04-04 08:20 (UTC)

How are you determining that the accounts are suspended? When I view them in AUR it says "Status: Active".

Is there a way to get @Muflone's attention here? They were the ones who approved my request to have purism-chatty merged here a couple of days ago. Should I just ask via the aur-general mailing list?

I've got no problems removing this person as a maintainer if they're no longer welcome in the AUR due to repeated abuses/violations, but like I said before: it seems that for the last few months they're the ones who maintained the purism-chatty package, so I want to be as respectful to their contributions as I possibly can.

MarsSeed commented on 2024-04-04 08:00 (UTC)

As of now it seems both of Pellegrino Prevete's accounts are suspended (@tallero, @truocolo). He continued to attack not just regular users but PM's as well, despite numerous warnings to stop. He spammed the aur-general mailing list. He also uploaded ~30 new dead-on-arrival packages during the last 2 months, many of which were not even meant to be compatible with Arch Linux, only his own custom Android setup. And he refused to fix them or make them compatible with Arch, despite @Muflone's polite and expert advice on how to do so.

Btw he also spreads smear about AUR PM @Muflone on social media. (Which is illegal, although I doubt @Muflone would go to the courts for such a low-influence person.)

<deleted-account> commented on 2024-04-01 15:46 (UTC)

Uh, hmmm. From what I can see Pellegrino Prevete was temporarily banned for uploading ROMs to the AUR at some point in the past. That's ... certainly not a great thing to do, hehe ;)

But actually, when I look at the history of the purism-chatty project, I see that most of the recent maintenance work was done by this person.

So I'm going to keep them as a maintainer here, but if anything suspect is pushed to this package in future, we can certainly re-evaluate.

MarsSeed commented on 2024-04-01 15:40 (UTC)

Please kindly remove Pellegrino Prevete (@tallero & @truocolo) from co-maintainers.

He is known for pushing hundreds of broken, dead-on-arrival changes to packages. And he tends to be combative when legitimate issues are pointed out.

One of his accounts, @truocolo has already been suspended by Arch staff.

<deleted-account> commented on 2024-03-30 08:30 (UTC)

Hello, I've submitted a new AUR package to replace this one: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gnome-chatty

It's updated to 0.8.2 and fixes (well, works around) the upstream issue with libcmatrix.

I added the folks currently listed as maintainers on this package as co-maintainers for the new one:

SamWhited tallero truocolo genofire dos1 julianfairfax lafleurv

electricprism commented on 2024-01-26 07:17 (UTC)

I was getting this error:

Chatty-v0.8.0/meson.build:121:13: ERROR: Subproject exists but has no meson.build file.

A full log can be found at ~/.cache/paru/clone/purism-chatty/src/build/meson-logs/meson-log.txt
==> ERROR: A failure occurred in build().
    Aborting...

So I cd ~/.cache/paru/clone/purism-chatty/src/Chatty-v0.8.0/subprojects and rmdir libcmatrix and git clone https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/libcmatrix and then I was able to cd ~/.cache/paru/clone/purism-chatty/ && makepkg -si