For the information, his package ended up with the wrong name because the PKGBUILD contains this: pkgname=identicurse pkgver=git pkgrel=1 Instead of: pkgname='identicurse-git' pkgver=20120123 pkgrel=1 The name of the package must end with -git in order to be a git package. Then the pkgver is the version, or in our case, the current date its submited to AUR for a git package. - When a change is done in Git, your users will get the new files. - If you ever have to update the PKGBUILD file for any reason, update the pkgver variable with the new current date, then upload to AUR as a new package, it'll automatically replace the older one with your fixes. - If you have to do it twice in the same day, increment pkgrel to, say, 2 or 3, etc. but keep the same date. SO! The best way to go, again in my opinion, ask for a removal of both packages in the AUR, then fix the two PKGBUILDs and their names, then re-upload online. That's what I'd do. On Jan 23, 2012, at 6:50 PM, Psychedelic Squid <psquid@psquid.net> wrote:
On 23/01/12 at 06:29pm, Alex Belanger wrote:
I'm not a Trusted User (they know much more stuff than I do about packages), but in my opinion the name choices were wrong in the first place.
You may want to go through the trouble of warning your users about the future name changes, then ask here to make it happen.
Of course it's annoying for the end-users but if its for the better... why not.
Most of us will quickly give a look in the AUR as soon as something break for an explanation. Just don't forget to write about it in the comments.
Btw, does the other maintainer knows?
On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:07 PM, Psychedelic Squid <psquid@psquid.net> wrote:
-- SNIP --
Yes, the wrong name choices are why both myself and timttmy would prefer them to be changed (he made a previous attempt at some time around the 26th of Oct last year[1], but somehow the package just ended up with a different version number. I'm not 100% sure why).
I was hoping there was some way to have AUR wrappers understand that the packages had renamed, but I had suspected that there wasn't anything of that nature. Ah well.
Anyway, I'll get on with making sure people are reasonably aware of the name change, then post a follow-up here once it should be safe to do the rename.
Thanks for the help!
[1] see the comments on <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42734>