El 17/05/2015 a las 4:52 p. m., Bruno Pagani escribió:
Le 17/05/2015 23:45, Johannes Löthberg a écrit :
On 17/05, Johannes Löthberg wrote:
On 17/05, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
ArchangeGabriel  filed a deletion request for exfalso :
I need to reupload this package with a pkgbase (quodlibet) variable, and AFAIK, this goes through removal of the existing package.
Could you upload a quodlibet package without the exfalso split package in it and then request a merge if you want the new package to keep the votes and comments?
Actually, scratch that, you won't be able to upload a quodlibet package because it exists in the repos and the repo package has exfalso in it. Is there anything different at all in this package?
Indeed. It’s exfalso without quodlibet (I only use the former, and a lot of other people too), another way to do this would be splitting the repo package into four (or more, if splitting l10n):
Should I open a bug against quodlibet packaging on Arch?
As Johannes Lothberg pointed out, not the Arch way. If it happens, is the exception that confirms the rule.
I have not examined the source code, but considering that Python is so flexible about namespaces, you could even manage to make it coexist with the repo package by renaming the executable script, perhaps renaming the main library entry point and do some sed magic in a couple of files in the package() section of your PKGBUILD.