The comments were sent to me indeed. However, I didn't receive any email notification about the package is marked as out of state. The comment is just a simple 'bad taste' without any link or other advice. The commenter is not a trusted user either and thus I won't simply accept the pull request without going through the change one by one to be on the safe side. I always compile and test the package during our cluster upgrade, which happens once or twice per year. After all, the package works. Now, let me repeat it again, I didn't receive any notification when the package was marked as out of state. I just searched my email again. You can see I recently updated my other three packages per other people's suggestions. I acted very quickly, if the comment is reasonable and not as simple as a 'bad taste'. If other users are not satisfied with my package, they can always fork and put a link under my package, instead of 'robbing'. Now , all things considered, can I get the maintainer status back? Best, Manhong Sent from phone On Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 7:43 PM Doug Newgard wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 19:26:07 -0400 Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:

...

Hi Freswa,

Somebody pointed me to your reply in the list. I didn't even know that the request in the AUR request system was sent to this email list, nor I know such an email list existed.

I agree that you think you already gave enough explanation from your point of view. However, please think about it in my shoes, I I didn't even know such an email list existed before I sent the last request through the AUR website, and I just registered it about an hour ago to appeal. If you think I spammed this request system, I am sorry for it. But from my point of view, I have been extremely patient and following the ladder to appeal, because I didn't get any email or any response on the AUR website, which just says one word 'rejected'.

I am also a very responsive package maintainer. You can check out my other packages, as long as other people submitted a suggestion, I responded the second day, and accepted their suggestions.

In terms of the package SGE, I just searched my email again but didn't find any email saying that the package is marked as out-of-date. It will be hard to believe that a package that was submitted just four months ago is already marked as out of date. It worked on a cluster of all our Arch Linux nodes four months ago, and it is still working on the latest Arch Linux. It worked on both new node installation and old node upgrade . I would never have thought to check the AUR website to see if I am still a maintainer. All I got was the two emails, one saying it was disowned, the other saying it was adopted, and they are 19 minutes apart.

Now I understand that each AUR package maintainer should join the email list and keep watching it. Given this special circumstance, can I get the maintainer status for the package SGE back?

Best, Manhong

And the comment left on the AUR page, that you would have gotten a notification from? They were right, the PKGBUILD was in absolutely terrible shape. Nobody said it was out of date, just that it very, very badly needed fixing and you were ignoring it. You would have then gotten notifications on Sept 19th when it was first requested that it be orphaned, on Oct 6th when a second request the it be orphaned was filed, and on Oct 10th when it was requested for a 3rd time that it be orphaned.

Note that none of those notifications require you to be subscribed to any mailing list. They were sent directly to you.

With the state of the PKGBUILD and no response, removing the maintainer was the right thing to do, without question.

Thanks a lot for your reply! I commented on the package hoping the new maintainer can return the maintainer to me. But I am willing to answer your question. A pull request needs a lot of effort to check. The pull request changed a lot of files and it is not that easy to see if the change is not malicious. That being said, now do you understand that why I would trust a 'trusted user' more? After all, 'trusted user' was named so for a reason, right? If changing package status to 'out of state ' doesn't send any notification, it is SCARY. Not everybody can check out the aur email list everyday and we all work on there packages for free. Why it is scary? What if a malicious user submit a ticket like this and the become the maintainer for a package that is not popular but could access sensitive data, like SGE? Think about it, the disowning already sends notification, why doesn't the warning 'out of state' send the email? On another note, maybe the AUR package should be named like github does. Adding the user name to the path will save such headache for both you and me...... Best, Manhong Sent from phone On Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 8:14 PM Doug Newgard wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 20:01:45 -0400 Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:

...

The comments were sent to me indeed. However, I didn't receive any email notification about the package is marked as out of state.

And what in the world does "out of state" even mean? Of course there's no notification for it, it's not a thing.

...

The comment is just a simple 'bad taste' without any link or other

advice.

...

The commenter is not a trusted user either and thus I won't simply accept the pull request without going through the change one by one to be on the safe side. I always compile and test the package during our cluster upgrade, which happens once or twice per year. After all, the package works.

Without any link or other advice, but it had a pull request. You're contradicting yourself here.

You think you can ignore people just because they're not a TU? Think again.

Saying the package works is not a defense. You couldn't even get something as simple as the pkgver right.

...

Now, let me repeat it again, I didn't receive any notification when the package was marked as out of state. I just searched my email again.

And again, "out of state" is not a thing.

...

You can see I recently updated my other three packages per other people's suggestions. I acted very quickly, if the comment is reasonable and not

...

simple as a 'bad taste'. If other users are not satisfied with my

as package,

...

they can always fork and put a link under my package, instead of 'robbing'.

Now , all things considered, can I get the maintainer status back?

Best, Manhong Sent from phone <snip all previous>

And stop top posting. https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Code_of_conduct#Top_posting

I actually did read your email. You said I cannot get a simple thing such as pkgver right. Let me explain to you, from your point of view, you certainly want to have some rule or guideline to make all the package has the same standard. That is understandable and it is what make Arch Linux popular. I would love to be compliant with the rule whenever I have the resource, and I did with all other my AUR packages.

From my point of view, a pkgver is not the point here. I do need to make my modified SGE package can be compiled with the latest SSL, GCC, other Linux contribution, and can be used to upgrade an old node without losing configuration. No matter how bad a pkgver is defined, an Arch Linux with a working SGE is away better, right?

The problem is actually not on my side. Your request system has my email address, I sent you a request after the package was adopted, some bystanders figured out I didn't get any reply and sent your reply to me, That is when I knew that the request is also in the mail list, and such email list exists...... Because you are attacking my capability, and I believe everybody who can read will know your claim is actually baseless, I did ignore your personal attack in my previous email. Yes, I can say sorry about ignoring hat. Best, Manhong Sent from phone On Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 10:11 PM Doug Newgard wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 20:30:11 -0400 Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:

...

Thanks a lot for your reply! I commented on the package hoping the new maintainer can return the maintainer to me.

But I am willing to answer your question.

A pull request needs a lot of effort to check. The pull request changed a lot of files and it is not that easy to see if the change is not malicious. That being said, now do you understand that why I would trust a 'trusted user' more? After all, 'trusted user' was named so for a reason, right?

If changing package status to 'out of state ' doesn't send any notification, it is SCARY. Not everybody can check out the aur email list everyday and we all work on there packages for free. Why it is scary? What if a malicious user submit a ticket like this and the become the maintainer for a package that is not popular but could access sensitive data, like SGE?

Think about it, the disowning already sends notification, why doesn't the warning 'out of state' send the email?

On another note, maybe the AUR package should be named like github does. Adding the user name to the path will save such headache for both you and me......

Best, Manhong Sent from phone

You didn't read a single word I wrote. Don't bother replying if you can't read.

You are right that I don't know what 'out of state' or 'out of date' or 'out of whatever' is. All I know is that I suddenly lost the ownership and will have to change my cluster maintenance code tomorrow..... In terms of pkgver or pkgbuild. Now you said nobody cares about pigver, guess who said this sentence below? 'You couldn't even get something as simple as the pkgver right' It turned out I can read and actually remember.... Best, Manhong Sent from phone On Mon, Oct 12, 2020, 10:46 PM Doug Newgard wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:38:02 -0400 Manhong Dai via aur-general wrote:

...

I actually did read your email. You said I cannot get a simple thing such as pkgver right.

Let me explain to you, from your point of view, you certainly want to have some rule or guideline to make all the package has the same standard. That is understandable and it is what make Arch Linux popular. I would love to be compliant with the rule whenever I have the resource, and I did with all other my AUR packages.

From my point of view, a pkgver is not the point here. I do need to make my modified SGE package can be compiled with the latest SSL, GCC, other Linux contribution, and can be used to upgrade an old node without losing configuration. No matter how bad a pkgver is defined, an Arch Linux with a working SGE is away better, right?

The problem is actually not on my side. Your request system has my email address, I sent you a request after the package was adopted, some bystanders figured out I didn't get any reply and sent your reply to me, That is when I knew that the request is also in the mail list, and such email list exists......

Because you are attacking my capability, and I believe everybody who can read will know your claim is actually baseless, I did ignore your personal attack in my previous email.

Yes, I can say sorry about ignoring hat.

Best, Manhong Sent from phone

So you read it and you're STILL top posting in violation of the rules. And making up something called "out of state" which doesn't exist. And claiming that you have to be on a mailing list when it's been explained, multiple times, that you don't. You claim you're reading, now try understanding.

Nobody cares what your point of view is on pkgver. It's obvious to pretty much anyone that's ever written, or even read, a PKGBUILD.

Then try reading again, as that's not what I said at all. You either have a serious issue with reading comprehension or you're just making things up now.

And you're STILL violating the rules of just about every mailing list out there, even after being told twice.

Just to try to calm down the conversation. Manhong, you say that this is your package, however, AUR is not the right place to host "your own" package, it is a place to host the community's packages. Actually, there is a dedicated maintainer who takes care of a package, and it seems that in the last times you didn't take enough care of the sge package (there is a set of rules to follow that make you a good care-taker: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_package_guidelines), so you aren't the maintainer anymore. This seems fair. You complain about not being notified before you lost the maintainership. The maintainer always receives e-mail notifications to its personal e-mail address. You are the only one who does not receive it, maybe there is a problem on your side... In any case, there are some rules. They have been followed. And nobody can give you back the maintainership. You can ask to become a co-maintainer which sounds good, you do not have to bear all the burden alone! If you want to host "your own" package, following your own rules for the PKGBUILD format, and don't bothering with the community's rules, feel free to host your own AUR service on your cluster. Kind regards, Alexis