Marcell, as per balena's own naming scheme [a], it is Balena Etcher, this is also true of the name of their binaries [b], the packages on other systems [c], and the name of their distributed releases on the github. Agreed that it should be on the latest full release. etcher-bin is not the same as this package. For someone who claims to have nothing against appimages, you sure do seem to spend a lot of time requesting the deletion of them. [a] https://etcher.balena.io/ [b] https://github.com/balena-io/etcher/releases [c] https://github.com/balena-io/etcher#debian-and-ubuntu-based-package-reposito... On 17/06/2023 18:04, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for balena-etcher-appimage [2]:
This is not needed.
Pkgname is wrong: the application's name itself is Etcher: no need to include vendor's name in package name. [a] There is no unrelated project package(s) named Etcher in Arch/AUR repos.
This package is on a prelelease version (v1.18.8) currently, but it should not be. A separate package should be created for unstable releases.
AUR already has the latest pre-built stable release of this application (v1.18.4 atm):
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/etcher-bin
Also the latter package integrates better with the system, without duplicating libraries.
The latter package has been much longer on AUR, since 2018, and has 150 votes. This one was uploaded in Jan 2023 and has only 6 votes.
If an AppImage based package is really desired, one should be created with the name 'etcher-appimage' for latest stable version and/or an adequately suffixed other package for unstable releases.
[a]: https://github.com/balena-io/etcher#readme
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/balena-etcher-appimage/