On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
Am Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:24:12 -0500 schrieb Brad Fanella <bradfanella@archlinux.us>:
Btw., it also happens every now and then that it takes some weeks until a package in [core] and [extra] is updated even if it's flagged as out-of-date. And there's no problem with that.
Sorry, that was my fail attempt at a joke. :-P
In fact I understood the joke. Now I have to say that this wasn't directed at you (personally). I knew, I'd better had kept my original allusion to Det. ;-)
Heiko
Not a problem. :-) On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Ray Rashif <schiv@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 24 September 2010 05:34, Brad Fanella <bradfanella@archlinux.us> wrote:
I don't think what I'm saying here is being clearly understood. :-(
Sorry, I missed the whole Det business. All in all, that kind of contribution (what Det appears to be doing) is not encouraged, but it _is_ somewhat of a contribution. From the way I see it, he's just a concerned party, preemptive about the fate of a particular package.
It's fine. :-) I just wanted someone to confirm my sanity! Note to readers: This is not implying that help on the AUR is not appriciated; rather, if you are going to update a package multiple times, please adopt it to make life easier. And use orphan requests as a last resort! Thanks, Brad