On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Rashif Ray Rahman firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On 12 January 2014 23:42, Karol Blazewicz email@example.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Karol Blazewicz firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Lukas Jirkovsky email@example.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Rashif Ray Rahman firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Since there was no 'rstudio' at the time that user uploaded this one, there is no infringement of any rule or guideline per se. Just tell them to upload an 'r-studio' to mitigate the confusion that resulted from it. I don't think there is any need to merge unless there were relevant comments. It is up to the maintainer to update the PKGBUILD with the suggested changes.
The question is whether the maintainer is still active at all. Hist last action is 2012-08-27 and he has only two packages, both over the year old with one being flagged out of date since February.
e-mail sent. If he doesn't respond in two weeks, maybe a TU can reupload and disown it, or remove it from the AUR altogether, whichever is deemed the correct action.
The maintainer has taken no action and didn't respond to my e-mail.
Did your e-mail actually get through to that address? It's being returned here, and if we'd known this before we could've just gone ahead and done what we wanted. An non-existent e-mail address is close to meaning a non-existent user.
-- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1
It wasn't returned. I e-mailed him and got no response, neither automated nor personal, no error, nothing.