Package Details: ido 12.10.2-4

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/ido.git (read-only)
Package Base: ido
Description: Widgets and other objects used for indicators
Upstream URL: https://launchpad.net/ido
Keywords: ido widgets
Licenses: LGPL
Submitter: City-busz
Maintainer: Gryffyn (horsemanoffaith)
Last Packager: horsemanoffaith
Votes: 53
Popularity: 0.778688
First Submitted: 2012-11-16 17:34
Last Updated: 2016-02-07 00:53

Latest Comments

horsemanoffaith commented on 2016-02-07 00:55

This package has been reverted back to public version. ido-ubuntu is now available for anyone wanting to build a newer version of ido.

WoefulDerelict commented on 2016-02-04 23:44

No problem, I can also be found on freenode. While I'm not always in #archlinux or #archlinux-aur I'm often online and hiding in #goat-dev. The channels are of course full of helpful users whenever you need help, granted in #goat-dev we are few and it's mostly nerding about automation on ARM using Go.

Once everything is sorted and ido-ubuntu is healthy I'd suggest a roll back to the public release here. While I may find pulling a specific git commit from the past mundane it isn't so for every user.

horsemanoffaith commented on 2016-02-04 22:10

Okay, I'll email you later.

WoefulDerelict commented on 2016-02-04 22:04

I'll gladly try to answer any questions I can.

horsemanoffaith commented on 2016-02-04 21:40

Makes sense. I already have the Ubuntu specific gtk packages here on the AUR. I will create a Ubuntu fork for libindicator and libappindicator and delete the other *indicator packages I have created.

On a side note, you sound pretty knowledgeable... any chance you could help me on some Unity related package issues? I have it sort-of working, but I'm coming across some issues I'm not quite sure how to fix.

WoefulDerelict commented on 2016-02-04 20:17

libindicator and libappindicator and their lib32 counterparts often get flagged out of accidental ignorance. The public releases remain static while development continues and Ubuntu specific patches are released with each successive iteration of the distribution. Much the same is true of ido save that Ubuntu has seen a private major version release.

The differences between ido 12.10.2 and ido 13.10.04 go deeper than dependence on additional features being patched into the GTK. Some of the interfaces have been modified along with feature introductions which causes issues on software expecting the old interface. The bulk of the changes in libindicator/libappindicator since release have been modifying them to work with ido 13.10.X to increase their feature set. If you are running those updated libraries as built by libindicator3/libappindicator3 you wouldn't be experiencing issues: just enjoying pretty widgets.

A Ubuntu specific fork would be an ideal solution to allow all users to choose which solution they need. Are they just shoehorning a Ubuntu 12.04 LTS binary onto their system like Steam or do they want current Unity with some additions to GTK for enhanced widgets and indicators?

horsemanoffaith commented on 2016-02-04 19:42

I haven't heard of any compatibility issues with this package, but I just may not be aware of them. I know there were issues with libindicator and libappindicator being flagged out-of-date, and that is why I updated this package to the version I did. Perhaps, as you said, I should break off an Ubuntu-specific ido. That would not present any problem on my end.

WoefulDerelict commented on 2016-02-04 19:23

This updated version of ido is reported to break compatibility with the public release versions of libindicator and libappindicator which already had packages in the AUR. The libraries were of course dependant upon the public release this package used to provide. The most common use case I am aware of for these libraries is the running of binaries distributed via steam and the client its self without the distributed runtime. If one recalls correctly it is necessary for Steam's notification icon to be displayed correctly in GNOME.

I agree that Unity and it's related components should be viable options on Arch; however, I don't think it should come at the expense of breaking things that worked just fine for existing users. The point I am making that adoption of Unity/Ubuntu specific code which represents a specific usage case should be a clear up front choice. In the downline package libindicator3 it erroneously lists the standard gtk packages as a dependency when given that it is built against this version of ido it will require the gtk{2,3}-ubuntu packages. In respecting the user's right to choose ido and ido-ubuntu should have been options to allow them to adopt the appropriate library according to their needs.

I've contributed to packages in this chain in the past and would not have an objection to maintaining it.

horsemanoffaith commented on 2016-02-04 17:44

Woeful, while the new version of ido does use Ubuntu versioning, I do not believe it breaks compatibilty with other packages. I have been using the Unity-for-Arch ido package for years and I've never had compatibilty issues. As I mention in my libappindicator package comments, I am looking to redo versioning/naming schemes, which will be creating new PKGBUILDS. If someone wants to use lightdm-unity-greeter, that's their choice, right? Most of the required by's are Unity based, anyway. Gryffyn, if you don't want to maintain it any longer, I'll be happy to.

WoefulDerelict commented on 2016-02-04 15:37

Gryffyn: It seemed you'd been doing quite well. Do you no longer wish to maintain it?

All comments