Am Fri, 1 Jun 2012 20:42:47 +0000 schrieb Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca>:
Um, I don't think you understood his idea,
I think I did understand his idea.
but at least it didn't stop you from replying with your usual abrasive tone.
Am I not allowed to answer, particularly if I think the idea is pointless? And, no, it is not an abrasive tone. Those are just facts. And I had the impression that Marcin didn't think about the reasons why a package is usually (in most cases) orphaned. It's peculiar that people get personally if they don't share an opinion.
Simplified version: User Foo maintains x packages in AUR Foo decides to leave Arch for another distro Foo orphans his packages because he does not expect to be able to maintain them Foo later realizes how much better Arch is and returns to Arch as a prodigal son Foo is now ready to resume maintenance of his old packages *if necessary* Foo sees that y packages have been adopted and Foo is happy Foo would like to easily re-adopt the (x-y) packages that are still orphans
I already understood this. This doesn't change anything. Still no reason for an automation. In those very rare cases I guess the previous maintainer still knows which packages he had maintained, and wants to continue maintaining. So he already can easily search for and adopt those packages. Btw., I read at least one comment in the AUR in which the old maintainer asked to be removed from the #Contributor flag in the PKGBUILD. So I think that not everybody would be happy with such a previous maintainer field in the AUR. Heiko