Hi 7Ji, Firstly, may I ask what's the difference between the universal version `wechat` and `weixin`? If its just a newer version of WeChat, then it should remain the wechat-uos package name or prefix. People from the #archlinux-cn group and I tested and realized that WeChat cannot run or login without some system files from the UOS system. Therefore it's still exclusive to China's UOS. Naming it "-universal" might be a little misleading in my opinion. I also believe that they are keeping the old "weixin" (probably unmaintained) because the fact that the so called "Universal" Qt version doesn't port over any data from legacy Electron version "weixin" (Chat history, Pictures, Videos etc.) Causing a breaking upgrade which is not ideal for a non-rolling distribution. It is advisable to update the original "wechat-uos" and put in a .install file to remind users about this breaking change using `post_upgrade`. Arch is always a rolling "always up-to-date" system, therefore it is suggested that a new package called wechat-uos-legacy submitted to the AUR for those who doesn't want to upgrade and introduce a detection logic in wechat-uos which reminds old users to migrate their data or install a legacy version. I apologize about the script calling the Tencent WeChat a "trashApp". But it's an internal variable for debugging bubblewrap sandbox which was never meant to be used or seen by users. Also regarding the non-Arch detection logic, I don't see the any reason why not including it. This detection prevents the issue which appears on systems with a modification package "moeOS" installed, and from my knowledge it never broke any Arch user's installation. According to you mail reply, unfortunately the wechat-uos-bwrap is broken on your system. But I didn't see any reports from you on the AUR comments area (or maybe it's missed). If there's an issue with the package, please report so that I can improve the quality of this script. Nevertheless, I still suggests that updating `wechat-uos` and merge all other "Native WeChat" packages into it, including wechat-uos-bwrap, wechat-beta-bwrap and wechat-universal. -- Sincerely, Kimiblock

Hi Aᴀʀᴏɴ, If you test the old wechat-uos package in a sandbox (assuming you have a WeChat account), you'll realize that the old version is lacking a good amount of functions such as chat history saving and VoIP. UOS called the new "Universal" WeChat an "Reconstruct and Upgrade" ("升级" is upgrade in Chinese, while "重构" is reconstruct) in their blog post provided by 7Ji[a] and their AppStore[b][c] which provided a feature list which the old version lacks. This in my point of view proves that the new Qt version is an upgrade to the old one, and the old version is just keeping there so that users who don't want to migrate staying on the old version just fine. (UOS is advertising itself "stable", after all) I personally agree the fact that this is a small breaking update, but that's just users' downloaded files stored in a different place. If anyone wants the old version, they should package an old wechat-uos-legacy-bin instead of expecting wechat-uos staying on the old version indefinitely. It'll be more sensible if wechat-uos's maintainer(s) introduce a detection logic which alerts old users where the old data is located at. -- Sincerely, Kimiblock [a]: https://bbs.chinauos.com/zh/post/17786 [b]: https://postimg.cc/bDt46brm [c]: https://postimg.cc/1nQbjXFP

Hi, I've introduced a split package `wechat-uos-qt` whose pkgbase is `wechat-uos-bwrap`. The old `wechat-uos-bwrap` pkgname will be removed after a certain amount of time to ensure users will have a smooth upgrade to `wechat-uos-qt`. Package contents are slowly being transferred to the new split package. As a result, `wechat-uos-bwrap` will gradually become an empty package with replaces, conflicts, and other dependency-related properties. (Waiting for PMs to initiate the merge operation, and thanks for everyone providing proposals on this thread) -- Sincerely, Kimiblock

I agree the fact that this so-called universal WeChat is not entirely exclusive to UOS, but this specific version borrowed from UOS needs a library called libuosdevicea to properly login into a WeChat account. Otherwise, it will just show the login failed prompt. Due to the proprietary code, we don’t know for sure whether those Kylin packages contain the exact same feature… What I concern about is the Universal advertising may let people confuse the new package with the old Electron version, as they are both technically using a universal graphical UI framework (Qt + Custom Chromium or Electron). -- Sincerely, Kimiblock

Hi, Sorry to make a bump here, but it has been more than a month since this thread gone quiet, and PM's are not really responding to these 2 requests regarding wechat-universal-bwrap and wechat-beta-bwrap. I understand the fact that requests are really flooding recently, but this has to be solved. It is sad for me to see an original package made by me get duplicated 2 times, and duplication isn't eliminated. To the point where maintaining AUR packages seems pointless because someone can just copy and modify your script to create a new package featuring the exact same content. I request Package Maintainers spend some time solving this messy situation. If there is any evidence that needs to be pointed out, let me know. -- Sincerely, Kimiblock

Hello Aaron, Thank you for the reply.

How does being unfriendly to a proprietary corporation violate the code of conduct? It's not really a political topic, Tencent and WeChat aren't "someone" so it does not count as a personal insult, and "respect other ... projects" only applies to FOSS stuff.

Respect other operating systems and projects Maligning other FOSS projects or distributions, or any other operating systems and their users is prohibited. The entire Arch team is happy to volunteer their time and energy to

I don't think CoC only requires us to respect FOSS orgs and projects, as stated in the CoC section about respect[e]: provide you with the Arch Linux distribution, documentation and forums. > Kindly show respect toward the volunteers, users and communities of other projects, distributions and operating systems as well.

Views, experiences and opinions are always welcome, but unproductive slander is not.

The FOSS here only limits the scope before the first comma, not after. We should show respect towards other projects, FOSS or not. Otherwise, people can be unproductive and bash around all those non-FOSS companies and projects, and phrasely badly towards Nvidia, Google, Adobe, etc in any Arch-related place, can't they? This is counter-intuitive and counter-productive and would bring a lot trouble and flame into the community, and this is not right.

As a side note, packages that don't build anything and instead install a precompiled version should have a -bin suffix.

But -bin suffix is only for packages with sources available, according to the AUR submission guidelines[a]:

Packages that use prebuilt deliverables, when the sources are available, must use the -bin suffix.

WeChat is released as binary only. There's no source available for it for general public to build from. As a reference, other popular prebuilt-only packages exist on AUR without the -bin suffix, e.g. typora[b], google-chrome[c], linuxqq[d], etc [a]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Rules_of_submissi... [b]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/typora [c]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/google-chrome [d]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/linuxqq [e]: https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#respect-other-operating-sy... Yours, Guoxin "7Ji" Pu

Hi everyone

I've felt that it's necessary to summarize up my thoughts towards this messy WeChat situation on the AUR.

Above all, the "wechat-uos-bwrap" is the first package containing the new (and originally leaked on a BBS...) so called "Universal" version on the AUR. And there a clearly evidences showing that other packages such as "wechat-beta-bwrap" and "wechat-universal-bwrap" (sorry for the typo before) are duplicate packages of the original "wechat-uos-bwrap". Thus, according to the AUR submission guidelines[a] such packages should not be submitted to AUR in the first place. If one want to change the package name, they should discuss this in the comments area under the package details in the AURWeb.

First of all let me try to understand the correct situation, I've read all the previous messages and it seems to me Tencent still maintains both softwares/versions at the same time. If this is correct, where BOTH versions are still updated regularly, then both packages can co-exist in the AUR. At the opposite, whenever a package is the older version and a newer - even if entirely different (QT vs Electron) then the newer version should replace the previous version, regardless the backend framework used. What is the current situation for both softwares? Sorry but I'm not familiar with Chinese and I might misunderstand by trying to read the qq website by myself. Regards -- Fabio Castelli aka Muflone

Ey,

On Mar 17, 2024, at 2:36 AM, 7Ji wrote:

...

Maligning other FOSS projects or distributions, or any other operating systems and their users is prohibited.

The FOSS here only limits the scope before the first comma, not after. We should show respect towards other projects, FOSS or not.

The only thing "FOSS" doesn't apply to is "other operating systems and their users", which is the only thing after the comma. The Arch COC serve to prevent controversy and bad feelings. So far, sour feelings towards proprietary projects have not produced such. Anyways, it would serve better to have a shorter and more descriptive name for that option. As you say, I am indeed incorrect that the package must end in a -bin suffix. Cheers, Aᴀʀᴏɴ