On 20/06, Johannes Dewender wrote:
Am 20.06.2015 um 13:34 schrieb Johannes Löthberg:
On 20/06, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Those kinds of questions are often at least acceptable on aur-general, though arch-general might be more appropriate. But they really belong in community places for said software.
Well, for anything that is somewhat controversial I think aur-general is fine, since aur-requests probably doesn't have many subscribers (especially not many non-TUs).
However, I don't think these package removals were controversial.
I wasn't talking about requests at all. Those should be on the aur-requests ML, possibly CCing the maintainer yourself if you don't open a proper AUR request which will CC them automatically.
I contacted the owner of these packages and included a link to this discussion and asked what's the problem he tries to solve, since at least one of the packages was recent (from this year). The deletion showed that this is not the right solution, but he probably still wants to solve his problem ;-)
-- Sincerely, Johannes Löthberg PGP Key ID: 0x50FB9B273A9D0BB5 https://theos.kyriasis.com/~kyrias/