Package Details: seafile 9.0.13-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/seafile.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: seafile
Description: An online file storage and collaboration tool
Upstream URL: https://github.com/haiwen/seafile
Licenses: GPL2
Conflicts: seafile-server
Provides: seafile-client-cli
Submitter: eolianoe
Maintainer: Joffrey
Last Packager: Joffrey
Votes: 110
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2016-08-11 16:38 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-04-04 12:14 (UTC)

Pinned Comments

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Next › Last »

BunBum commented on 2014-02-21 07:16 (UTC)

Ok thank you. I will have a look at the GitHub issue.

<deleted-account> commented on 2014-02-20 19:13 (UTC)

No problem, and I am also a bit sad about that, though more annoyed than sad. Anyway, you can always monitor or post to the issue I linked, that is where I post when I notice there's a new binary release without corresponding sources.

BunBum commented on 2014-02-20 18:26 (UTC)

Ah ok ok I understand. I thought the download link was a source tarball. That explains a lot. Thank you for clarifying. Big sorry! So I (we) have to wait for a source releas from the seafile crew... I am sad that the Seafile developers are not accurate with their source code.

<deleted-account> commented on 2014-02-20 17:56 (UTC)

> so you would have to change it in your PKGBUILD As I already explained, your new download link is a binary blob, not a source tarball!? This is not a binary package (it's seafile-server, not seafile-server-bin), so that blob by itself, without any accompanying sources gives me nothing I can actually use - it's neither a new download URL (for sources I can use), nor a changelog (for sources I can use) relevant to this package (yet!). I do not wish to - once again - repeat the discussion as to what constitutes a source release, because that's up to the Seafile developers, *not* me. Regarding this, please refer to this issue where you will find the last statement from the Seafile developers on this subject I know of: https://github.com/haiwen/seafile/issues/406 As a short rule of thumb: Flagging out-of-date should afaik only be done, if there's a new version available to which the package in question can be updated. That is not the case, as - by the Seafile developers own rules - there is no released source relating to that binary blob.

BunBum commented on 2014-02-20 15:50 (UTC)

My question was only because in the PKGBUILD file you download the sources from GitHub. The new download link here (http://seafile.com/en/download/) points to https://bitbucket.org/haiwen/seafile/downloads/seafile-server_2.1.5_i386.tar.gz so you would have to change it in your PKGBUILD. So I have a new download URL and a changelog (https://seacloud.cc/group/3/wiki/server-changelog/) for a new version. This is not enough for a new release? Only a GitHub tag is relevant to flag this package as out dated?

<deleted-account> commented on 2014-02-20 15:13 (UTC)

Please don't take this the wrong way, but that's a question for the Seafile developers (open up a github issue there?), not for the Archlinux package maintainer. I am not involved in the Seafile project other than packaging it and reporting issues, so I have no more knowledge / influence on their internal decision making / future decisions. However, based on their bitbucket repository (which I found based on your question) https://bitbucket.org/haiwen/seafile, which contains no source and only binary downloads, I'd hazard a guess to "no, they aren't moving", but please take that with a grain of salt. Also, please read the previous comments for the whole story, but the short version is, that Seafile developers tend to forget to tag their releases, so the packages are not out of date until they do so.

BunBum commented on 2014-02-20 14:07 (UTC)

https://seacloud.cc/group/3/wiki/server-changelog/ and http://seafile.com/en/download/ indicates that version 2.1.5 is out now. But the downloadlink points to bitbucket. Are they moving away from GitHub?

BunBum commented on 2014-02-14 23:45 (UTC)

Please add "armv7h". I've tested it and it worked nicely.

<deleted-account> commented on 2014-01-28 10:35 (UTC)

It doesn't necessarily go into /srv. Mine for example goes into /home/seafile/. Any script made for that purpose would either place further restrictions on how you can setup your server, or become more complex for any restriction it doesn't make. In order to do it properly, you'd have to write a fairly complex script that handles both first installations as well as upgrades, because if you only do the first installation, you'll give be inconsistent. The truth - as I see it - is that you could write such a thing in probably a day (at most two), while the gain would be on average (my guess on how long it takes me) 1-2 minutes for the user (for each installation/update). The main reasons I haven't done that so far are that on the one hand I'd need to invest time to workaround a problematic design of Seafile - it's something they should fix in upstream imho and on the other hand that you're the first you has asked this. Everyone else (including me) didn't seem to have any problem with seahub not being installed automatically. While I can't speak of anyone else, but to me Arch is still a distrubtion where a level of fiddling is to be expected. However, if there really is a significant demand for such a thing (and it's not just you) I could look into adding it as time permits.

diensthunds commented on 2014-01-28 05:57 (UTC)

@calrama fair enough, is there not some way to include a post install script to finish off the installation of seahub? Since it is going into /srv/ anyways? I didn't notice the -testing for 2.1.4 I was just looking at the version on the download page.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Next › Last »