On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:27 PM, merp boop <synthead1@gmail.com> wrote:

Hey all,

Before I sound like anything I'm not!

- I don't really care about politics - I hate drama - I try my best to conform to standards in contributed work - I appreciate everyone that contributes to Arch - I understand that one can become emotionally invested in their efforts

That being said, another user created a package in the AUR called 'blink', which is basically a copy of my package, 'blink-darcs'.  This wouldn't cause any issues if 'blink' built from an archive of sources and didn't use darcs to pull the sources, but that's not the case. What's your opinion on this?  How should this be handled?

-Max

IMO one of the packages can be removed. I guess yours could be updated using the current python2 which the blink package of speps is based on. On the other hand, upstream is not offering its software through a channel different from darcs, which leads me to favoring a package name without a postfix. please come to an agreement with speps, and/or let your package be removed to blink-python26... cheers! mar77i