Although I understand your disagreement regarding the comment merge I can't see why two packages that provide pretty much the same functionality should exist in AUR. It's not like qastools is a huge multi-module package that would be better off if built separately. It's basically three binaries and some pixmaps. In my opinion it makes more sense to replace qasmixer with the complete package, since this is what upstream seems to suggest. That's why I asked for the removal and I'm sorry if this caused some kind of misunderstanding. I'm willing to reupload qasmixer back up, but honestly I can't see the point for such action. Regards Spyros On Mon 26 Mar 2012 10:08:26 PM EEST, speps wrote:
I maintain qastools and I do not totally agree to this merge. Qasmixer can be built singularly from the qastools source using the -DBUILD_LIST=qasmixer cmake flag (see attachment).
Also not always merging comments is a good idea, in this case they make no sense and may be misunderstood referring to qastools.
If you agree, I'll re-upload the attached build script to the AUR so a comments reversion can be operated (qastools -> qasmixer).
Next time it would be better wait for some other opinions when the packages to be merged do not share the same maintainer.
Cheers
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:01:07 +0200 Massimiliano Torromeo <massimiliano.torromeo@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Spyros Stathopoulos <foucault.online@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello everyone! The package I was maintaining "qasmixer" (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=48676) has been superseded by a collection of tools that include the one I was maintaining (qastools https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=54793). Therefore I would like to ask for qasmixer to be removed since the standalone sources for qasmixer have been removed from upstream.
Thanks! Spyros
qasmixer has been merged into qastools.
Thanks