Arch Linux User Repository

The original source link is broken. But luckily I've saved a mirror on github.

I'm using the mirror link for now. Please remind me if the original link is available again.

Prebuilt binary of this package can be found in the arch4edu repository.

What SGE stands for? Liverpool is not the original. Everybody knows it originally means 'sun grid engine'. Liverpool changed it to the 'son of grid engine.' and I just changed it to 'some grid engine' on my github repo. Both you and I are not in any authority to define what it is....

'All changes can be easily obtained and applied via a git pull from the source tree or by an AUR helper'

This is wrong. Why so many Linux administrators from CentOS and Debian read Arch Linux wiki these days? Arch Linux developer think in other people's shoes.

Your way is not easy for other distribution administrators. People have to look into the PKGBUILD file to modify their script, while it used to be ONE simple patch command.

Anyway, thanks for stopping saying "You failed to check the notification of your maintained package on time", which is not fact.

My pkgver is correct in the version before you took over, because my code modification is the upstream in this case.

The sge package here stands for the original sge by liv.ac.uk . So it should use the original package version. Your previous "pkgver", a date string, is actually the "pkgrel". If you want a sge package that follow your upstream, it should be named as sge-daimh.

Besides, please report your changes to liv.ac.uk to benefit more users.

It is mission impossible to fit SGE cleanly into the GNU filesystem layout with its current code.

See https://github.com/daimh/sge/blob/master/source/scripts/README.distinst . As I said before, I'm not using it for now to make the package compatible to your old version.

Upside is it is easier for you to check those C code modifications. Downside is it is hard for others who want to follow the package

Checking patches is necessary for anyone who wants to build or contribute to this package. However, a one big patch file is hard to check if the patch contains all needed changes and needed changes only. And this will make the package hard to follow. Not cleanly splitted patches.

BTW, your previous one big patch does contain unnecessary changes which are listed in https://github.com/petronny/sge/blob/master/sge.patch .

You will have to modify your PKGBUILD and all peoples who copied your patch files will have to do it too.

All changes can be easily obtained and applied via a git pull from the source tree or by an AUR helper. I don't see any trouble that will be caused and bother users or contributors. I'm even adding this package to a 3rd party repository. After adding the 3rd party repository, users even don't need to build the package.

The new release fixed all C compiling warnings, CMake support is added, among other improvements.

Thanks. But I think that there is a principle for maintaining Archlinux packages is adding as less patches as possible. Although the cmake changes are good, they are unnecessary.

For what it is worth, I released a new modification at https://github.com/daimh/sge

The new release fixed all C compiling warnings, CMake support is added, among other improvements. As CMake reduces the compiling time by a magnitude on a multi-core machine, and make the code modification and bug fixing much easier, SGE is finally modernized with CMake.

In addition, here is some explanation as you commented on my PKGBUIlD. According to Google translation,

1, "It’s really intolerable for pkgver to fill in this incorrectly". My pkgver is correct in the version before you took over, because my code modification is the upstream in this case. Or the original SGE from Liverpool won't be compiled successfully at all under Arch Linux

2, "You failed to check the notification of your maintained package on time". No, I didn't. I said I didn't get any email notifications before the orphaning, in both my first email sent to AUR-general and the emails after. User 'Bruno/Archange' also confirmed that a bug in the AUR web site failed to send out the orphaning request emails. Plus, I didn't even know AUR-general exists before this.

3, "You installed a lot of files that the package manager did not take over". It is mission impossible to fit SGE cleanly into the GNU filesystem layout with its current code. I actually plan to modify it but this is a radical change. I also noticed that you installed SGE under /opt too. It is fine as /opt on all Linux distributions is designed for software like this.

By the way, I noticed that your split my one single C code patch file to many small patch files. This is good and bad.

Upside is it is easier for you to check those C code modifications.

Downside is it is hard for others who want to follow the package. They will have to patch the files one by one too.

Even worse, what if a new GCC standard forces us to modify a lot of new .c files? You will have to modify your PKGBUILD and all peoples who copied your patch files will have to do it too. One signal patch file should have saved both you and them such trouble.

As AUR git has a size limitation, it is not wise to put code there, because 'git diff' doesn't help any more.

Just my two cents!

For packages not specific to a certain language, please comment in english only.

@a821 Fixed.

There are unquoted references to $srcdir in prepare.

The pkgver used to be 20200527 but now is 8.1.9. However 20200527 > 8.1.9 so epoch=1 might be required.

Thank you very much for you reply!

As you don't want to return the maintainer to me, I will have to put all my current and future SGE modification on https://github.com/daimh/sge , which will be ready in a few days.

Please cite other people's work in this package, if possible, just like I always quote the upstream URL.

Good luck and happy maintaining!

To daimh：

有关这个包的维护权，我花了2个月的时间，提了3次orphan request，期间甚至和archlinux的TU发生了争执，才拿到。

撇开这点不谈，让我disown这个包让你来接管我仍然是不接受的，原因有2：

1. 你上一个版本的PKGBUILD写的太差了。sge提供了可供分发的安装方式，然而你基本没看文档，通过.install在post install阶段装了一大堆包管理器没有接管的文件。这个暂且不提，但连pkgver都填错这个真的是有点不可容忍了。所以目前看来，我认为把这个包交给你来维护我是极度不放心的。

2. 你没有按时查收你维护的包的通知。也就是你没有尽到维护这个包的义务。若有查收的话，也不至于闹到我花2个月来强行orphan这个包。

综上，目前从能力和义务两个方面，我都不认同你能维护这个AUR包，所以我目前不会把维护权交给你。

针对你提及的，你有一个集群都在用这个包。我也是一样，我也有一个集群都在用我现在版本的这个包。刚才有提到过，sge有一个可分发的安装方式，但是我为了提供一定程度上和你那个版本的兼容性，我用了一点trick来保证路径是一样的。所以我觉得目前的这个包应该无害于你的集群，如果有/opt/sge下的文件冲突问题，也是上一版本你自己错用post install留下的锅，你自己把冲突文件删了就好。

针对你有提及的，过去10年间为sge能在所有发行版上运行做贡献。首先我感谢你对sge做的贡献。但这是一个Archlinux的包，能不能在所有发行版上运行不是我，TU，甚至所有archlinux用户要关心的首要问题，能不能在Archlinux上正确打包和运行才是我们首要关心的问题，你之前的PKGBUILD是很夸张的违背了Archlinux的打包原则的。

批评的内容就是这些。不过我也说了我目前不会把维护权交给你，不代表以后不会。同时我也希望sge可以由一些更熟悉它源码的人来维护。所以我目前的建议是这样：

1. 你可以去github或其他站点fork一份这个仓库，然后把你的后续改动提交到这个fork
2. 当你整理好你的改动后，请通知我，我去review一遍看是否符合标准
3. 我会尽可能在Archlinux的打包原则内merge你的改动
4. 如果我觉得改动频繁且你的改动基本ok以后，我会把你添加为Co-maintainer

如果你不认同这个建议，那么你也可以：

1. 直接向sge提交你的改动。针对一些编译问题的修复，你可能需要再添加一些判断gcc版本的代码。
2. 在AUR创建一个叫sge-daimh的包，然后在里面为所欲为吧

As I didn't know or join the aur email list and I didn't see any notification about this package would be disowned. All I saw was two emails saying this package is suddenly disowned and adopted.

Can you disown this package and return the maintainer to me?

All my cluster nodes are using this AUR package, plus, I have been modifying the code for the past decade to make it work on all kinds of Linux distribution. Thanks a lot for your help!

Thank you for make this package build.

However, the PKGBUILD is at a very bad state. I've rewrote it at https://github.com/petronny/sge.

Please merge it by

git pull https://github.com/petronny/sge

Also, I created a wiki page for sge.