Le 21/02/2021 à 20:03, Óscar García Amor via arch-general a écrit :

Hi,

When a user submit a package to AUR must follow package guidelines. There is an interesting point that says that in the top of PKGBUILD you must respect the previous contributors [1] and credit them (if any).

I'm surprised that this is not respected by the trusted users when they pick an arbitrary package that is maintained in AUR and upload it to the community repository without crediting anyone of past maintainers. I saw this course of acting in several packages and don't like to me. It seems to me a total lack of respect towards the person or people who have been keeping the package so far.

Are you sure that the PKGBUILD were actually taken from the AUR? For instance, it often happens to me that the PKGBUILD in the AUR is in a bad shape (or even sometimes that I miss the PKGBUILD already in the AUR, especially python packages where I just copy/paste from a template…), so I just restart from scratch. In this case I don’t credit anyone indeed. But of course when the PKGBUILD is complex, well written and mostly reused for the [community] version, I keep contributors (e.g. https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/mattermost/trunk/PKGBU...). Regards, Bruno/Archange

On Sun, 2021-02-21 at 17:03 +0100, Óscar García Amor via arch-general wrote:

Hi,

When a user submit a package to AUR must follow package guidelines. There is an interesting point that says that in the top of PKGBUILD you must respect the previous contributors [1] and credit them (if any).

I'm surprised that this is not respected by the trusted users when they pick an arbitrary package that is maintained in AUR and upload it to the community repository without crediting anyone of past maintainers. I saw this course of acting in several packages and don't like to me. It seems to me a total lack of respect towards the person or people who have been keeping the package so far.

If users of the AUR are required to have a minimum of netiquette, more should be required of TUs.

Greetings.

[1]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_submission_guidelines

The credit here is tied to the PKGBUILD, not the package. I did not copy your PKGBUILD, in fact I didn't even look at it. I rarely never do with AUR PKGBUILDs nowadays as I found that it usually takes me significantly more time fix them up rather than just copy one of mine and adjust it, especially for pretty well standardized ecosystems such as Python. What I did look at was the version, which was severely outdated, and the last update date, which was 3 years ago, so I honestly didn't even bother. I apologize if you felt cheated, but I did not in fact use your PKGBUILD. Filipe Laíns

I'm surprised that this is not respected by the trusted users when they pick an arbitrary package that is maintained in AUR and upload it to the community repository without crediting anyone of past maintainers. I saw this course of acting in several packages and don't like to me. It seems to me a total lack of respect towards the person or people who have been keeping the package so far.

It might be very possible, that the cases you mention don't need any credits, as those PKGBUILDs were probably written from scratch instead. In fact I know of a case where a very trivial package of mine was adopted by a TU into community: https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/blob/ packages/libquotient/trunk/PKGBUILD[1] That's me! :D -- Sefa Eyeoglu https://scrumplex.net[2] -------- [1] https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/blob/packages/ libquotient/trunk/PKGBUILD [2] https://scrumplex.net