search

pacstall / pacup.py

Help maintainers update pacscripts
GNU General Public License v3.0
12 stars 3 forks source link

[Feature]: Packages not listed on Repology #18

Open raxod502 opened 2 years ago

raxod502 commented 2 years ago

Is your feature related to a problem? Please describe.

Currently, Pacup supports packages that list a Repology filter in their Pacscript. However, some packages are not listed on Repology, especially third-party or proprietary software, e.g. Android Studio.

A clear and concise description of what you want to happen.

Ideally, it would be possible in the Pacscript to specify some arbitrary script to get the latest version number. There is prior art for providing this sort of feature, and I submit that it might be good to follow these examples in a similar implementation for Pacup:

Describe alternatives you've considered

If we don't want to go this route, then an alternative that would provide some of the same benefit with less complexity would be to allow running Pacup on Pacscripts that do not specify a Repology filter, by requiring the version number to be updated manually, but still taking care of the other steps automatically.

Additional context

No response

wizard-28 commented 2 years ago

Great suggestion! I've also thought about this issue. We already have a pkgver function for the -git pacscripts so it shouldn't be too much of a hassle to haven them in non -git pacscripts too! I would just need @Henryws's approval for that.

Also, I've thought about bypassing repology altogether for pacscripts that use urls from github or gitlab etc, as I can use their repository API to get the latest released version of the package instead.

What are your thoughts on this?

raxod502 commented 2 years ago

I might defer to Repology as a default, since I think it'd probably be more reliable. I've been bitten before by maintainers pushing weirdly formatted tags (or betas, prereleases, etc.) that mess up automatic version detection, and I trust Repology more to normalize things. But given that Pacup is run manually by maintainers and the results are audited, that might not be as big of an issue in this case.

wizard-28 commented 2 years ago

Great suggestion! I've also thought about this issue. We already have a pkgver function for the -git pacscripts so it shouldn't be too much of a hassle to haven them in non -git pacscripts too! I would just need @Henryws's approval for that.

Waiting for @Henryws's approval.

Zahrun commented 1 year ago

@Henryws up