Thank you. It would be wonderful to be given reasons why. That would help me contribute in a more acceptable way moving forward, which is ultimately my personal goal. As such, time can be made to contribute, but time can't be given to explain why a moderative action was taken and how best to proceed in the future. So again, thank you. On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 8:28 PM Giancarlo Razzolini <grazzolini@archlinux.org> wrote:

Em outubro 10, 2019 17:06 John Crist via arch-general escreveu:

...

I've submitted `base-extras` to the AUR at https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/base-extras/ that contains the missing packages from `base` if someone REALLY wants it.

And I have removed it. Following the same criteria, I've also removed base-devel-meta.

Regards, Giancarlo Razzolini

On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:15:42PM +0200, Robin Broda via arch-general wrote:

You've got the explanation in the mail that informed you about the removal automatically :)

I see in the archive[1] that these were deleted for not following the submission guidelines[2]. I'm not sure how that's the case, unless the logic is that since they merely bundle packages in Community that they violate rule #1? If that's the logic, does that mean any meta packages in the AUR violate the submission guidelines? Can someone clarify? I'm genuinely a little confused here ... [1] - https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-requests/2019-October/034288.html [2] - https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_submission_guidelines -- Daniel Moch daniel@danielmoch.com http://djmoch.org

The list of packages contained in earlier base group is given by https://www.archlinux.org/groups/x86_64/base/ link, like wise what are the stuff does the latest base package will install? i got only the dependencies list in here https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/any/base/ On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 04:11, Eli Schwartz via arch-general < arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

On 10/11/19 6:10 PM, Daniel Moch via arch-general wrote:

...

I see in the archive[1] that these were deleted for not following the submission guidelines[2]. I'm not sure how that's the case, unless the logic is that since they merely bundle packages in Community that they violate rule #1?

If that's the logic, does that mean any meta packages in the AUR violate the submission guidelines?

Can someone clarify? I'm genuinely a little confused here ...

[1] - https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-requests/2019-October/034288.html [2] - https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_submission_guidelines

Metapackages are a tough question, but in this case a metapackage to ease installation which requires one to use the AUR to get the metapackage seems to be quite pointless. Besides which, uploading a package as a reactive measure due to the lack of clarity with the former base group feels odd when people are working behind the scenes to try to figure out what a proper solution in the right place should look like.

-- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User