thejeff  filed a deletion request for tchathon :
je n’arrive pas a supprimer tchathon que j'ai mis sur votre git (une
peux vite en testant mon script pour l'envoyer qui a marché mdr)
ou le mettre a jour, j'ai tous supprimer et j'ai du mal pour la mise
à jour et je trouve pas comment le supprimer
Cordialement Jacques jerry
Eschwartz  filed a deletion request for fontconfig-enhanced-
The package was originally submitted with the comment:
"This a renamed version of fontconfig-good-defaults. A Trusted User
removed it for a reason which is clearly invalid and will not respond
to my emails. Next time a Trusted User thinks about deleting this, I
challenge them to name one rule that it breaks and explicitly state
how it breaks it. I also expect Trusted Users to hold all other
packages in the Arch User Repository to the same standards."
It is presumably obvious why evading a package deletion by renaming is
not okay, but for additional context, the original deletion happened
in this PRQ: https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-
Originally discovered because I was looking at the user's other
package "update-pacman-mirrorlist". Is this kind of behavior a trend?
Eschwartz  filed a deletion request for update-pacman-mirrorlist
The AUR is not a hosting provider for source code, and whether that
source code uses a compiler to compile to an ELF binary is irrelevant
to that fact. Additionally, "reflector" which is in community and has
existed far longer than this program, does everything that this
program does, better than this program does (with the exception of the
systemd timer for daily mirrorlist updates, because daily mirrorlist
updates are objectively stupid).
The maintainer has previously been warned against this in the
comments, and justified using the AUR as a hosting provider because:
"No, I really do not. What advantage would that bring? It would most
certainly over complicate the PKGBUILD and management of the project,
introduce additional potential for downtime, and require another
trusted party to host code."
In addition to deleting this pkgbase, someone with backend access
should probably purge it too, since the aur.git backend really
shouldn't have to store non-buildfiles resources in perpetuity (this
is, after all, the reason the AUR code tries to reject all blobs above
a certain size, and why actual hosting providers like Github exist).
trav90  filed a deletion request for palemoon-26 :
The build configuration used by this package does not produce binaries
that are acceptable for official branding and therefore are in
violation of the Pale Moon Redistribution License located at
Also, this is an old version that is no longer supported by the Pale
Moon team. Add-ons using the Jetpack SDK will work again in the next
(supported) release of Pale Moon, making this package unnecessary.
Thanks for your time,
Travis Wine (trava90)
Pale Moon Project Linux Maintainer