The prerelease should be deleted in favor of beta, as stated by its maintainer. See comments in flashplugin-beta. Comment by: anish on Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:57:37 +0000 @renan_freitas None, but this package will eventually be deleted in favour of flashplugin-beta Comment by: renan_freitas on Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:56:23 +0000 What is the difference between this, and http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47230 (flashplugin-beta ) On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Antonio Lucas wrote:

I was looking for some plugin that works in my machine and found these identical packages

These two have basically the same PKGBUILD except for one line  (a license file that is installed) flashplugin-prerelease http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32072 flashplugin-beta http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47230

I do not contacted any of maintainers. Both packages have lots of votes.

abracos (cheers) Antonio Lucas

-- (\_ /) copy the bunny to your profile (0.o ) to help him achieve world domination. (> <) come join the dark side. /_|_\ (we have cookies.)

Can I request that some sort of system be put in place for informing maintainers that their package is being deleted ? I was afk for a week or so and I come back to a deleted package. While that was the eventual idea, I had a close to a thousand votes for flashplugin-prerelease, and now that package is gone with no way of informing the users that the package is deleted. Most aur helpers I've seen do not inform users about deleted packages. -Anish On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Stefan Husmann

wrote:

Am 29.08.2011 20:15, schrieb Axilleas P:

The prerelease should be deleted in favor of beta, as stated by its

...

maintainer. See comments in flashplugin-beta.

Comment by: anish on Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:57:37 +0000

@renan_freitas None, but this package will eventually be deleted in favour of flashplugin-beta

Comment by: renan_freitas on Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:56:23 +0000

What is the difference between this, and http://aur.archlinux.org/**packages.php?ID=47230http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47230(flashplugin-beta )

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Antonio Lucas wrote:

...

I was looking for some plugin that works in my machine and found these identical packages

These two have basically the same PKGBUILD except for one line (a license file that is installed) flashplugin-prerelease http://aur.archlinux.org/**packages.php?ID=32072http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32072 flashplugin-beta http://aur.archlinux.org/**packages.php?ID=47230http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47230

I do not contacted any of maintainers. Both packages have lots of votes.

abracos (cheers) Antonio Lucas

removed flashplugin-prerelease, thanks to both of you.

On Wed, 07 Sep 2011, Lukas Fleischer wrote:

I usually drop a comment before removing a package, so that at least all users on the notification list get informed. In case of doubt, you can almost always check aur-general.

Yeah, this is a really good idea IMO. Pete.

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Anish Bhatt wrote:

Sadly they weren't merged in this case :( Infact, I didn't even know there was support for such a thing. While I would have loved merged votes & comments, I'm more concerned about the users left in the dark. Would implementing a "replaces" functionality for aur similar to the repos be a big hassle ? Perhaps a dummy package¸ say "delete-package" that automatically replaces every package that is actually deleted instead of being replaced ?

Hi. My two cents on the issue: Please avoid top posting. Well IMO this would be a reason to write a feature request for the aur-helper you're using, in fact I guess there are helpers that check for existence of installed packages. What I don't know is if the AUR ID number will be redirected on merged packages, which could help implementing replacing / we-changed-things-on-aur features. I don't think automatically adding replaces or stuff like this will help because the PKGBUILD is something we don't want to alter through code in AUR. cheers! mar77i