Not that I wouldn't mind the credit but it was Lukas Fleischer who implemented the official repo checking code and not me. He is also hosting the git repository for his branch of the AUR.

Oops, yeah, I saw this too at some point.

Your idea sort of sounds like "retiring" a package to me. That seems like an interesting idea but I am not sure the benefits are worth the work involved. The benefits that I can see are:

Well, a "retired" AUR package isn't much retiring in my notion, but more active than ever before, due to the fact that it is officially part of Archlinux at that point. The thing is that the intention behind this is to basically insert a cheery error page that would iron out the complaints from AUR maintainers that seem to come up frequently. It would improve the communication with TUs when there's a mailto address to the guy displayed, which does the package now.

+ keeping a backup of the source package (for whom? are they that valuable?) + keeping a backup of the comments, which hardly anyone can see (the original author? TUs?) <displace-by-topic-coverage> - what sort of design on the web could be used to show old retired package comments? you can't hide a package and show its comments. who is the end-user for old musty comments anyways?

The backup of the source package is unnecessary, as well as the comments to the point, that maybe said maintainer wants to look at it for a last time. So that could be, like some static you-might-be-looking-for-this-data-but-probably-not kind of way. Nice to have, no must-have, anyways. Just for the sake that I did read ppl complaining about that as well...

Just to be specific, a TU clicks the "Retire" button on a package to retire it. A retired package is hidden from the general user. Only the original author can see it. I suppose TU or devs could see it as well, in a special swanky section of the site. Problems I brainstormed:

- what happens if the original author disowns his invisible retired package? does he lose it never to found again? would anyone care?

There should no more be a way to disown that package. The intention is really just a bite more than the "database entry not found" surprise people now have. The only thing that can be done by that former owner and only that former owner is to approve, and when approved, it's going to be deleted.

Anyways there you go. If I were the one expected to spend time programming this (for free) I would say that it's not worth the effort.

That's more nicely said than unsubscribing this list, but you would remember by the fifth time this flame awakes as a zombie... :-D Let's see... cheers! mar77i