I think they do it because otherwise some users would remove their packages thinking nobody uses them while it might not be the case. People doesn't seem to understand a PKGBUILD, even if orphaned, does no harm and might even help some - as long as the name isn't conflicting with anything of course. Maybe a TU could explain it better the I. On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Leonidas Spyropoulos <artafinde@gmail.com>wrote:

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Andrzej Giniewicz <gginiu@gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 13.09.2012 21:59, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:

...

Hello,

I uploaded a new renamed version of one of the packages I maintain. Can someone please remove the old package from the repository?

Done, thanks.

Andrzej.

Thanks for that, is it possible for users like me to have access to manage their own packages? Surely not others packages but the ones they maintain seems logical.

-- Caution: breathing may be hazardous to your health.

#include <stdio.h> int main(){printf("%s","\x4c\x65\x6f\x6e\x69\x64\x61\x73");}

I like how you quoted my entire message and discarded only the very last line. You know, I've no idea about this, I'm not a TU myself. The only thing I can assure you is that they are doing it voluntarily, aka, not paid. It's a free willing act of "giving back to the community". Keep in minds they have guidelines to respect, that with theses powers comes more responsabilities and also they have been chosen by your peers. There are criterias, a selection and a voting process. As far as I would like Arch being a free place thingy, you need some kind of moderation to keep the standard high in the AUR. We have a masterpiece, an accomplishment made of thousand of volunteers. Be careful when bashing on people. They alone own more packages, submitted patches, helped others on IRC, etc. than you ever will. If you are to complain about the procedures, just try to achieve the same as they do. On Sep 14, 2012, at 3:01 AM, Zack Buhman <zack@buhman.org> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 01:43:03AM -0400, Alex Belanger wrote:

...

I think they do it because otherwise some users would remove their packages thinking nobody uses them while it might not be the case. People doesn't seem to understand a PKGBUILD, even if orphaned, does no harm and might even help some - as long as the name isn't conflicting with anything of course.

Implying TUs--with the relatively large volume of requests on this mailing list--can magically make an intelligent decision about whether an existing package is worthy of deletion?

I'm already aware all TUs are ninjas.. but Gods? I'm not sure about that one (as much as I'd love to be proven wrong).