Hello, We are contacting you about your recent AUR requests. While we understand your desire of unification for the Catppuccin packages in the AUR under a single ownership to "officially" maintain them (which is great), we would have preferred if those requests were done more appropriately. Indeed, uploading duplicate packages is against the rules of submission [1] and calling the "original" packages as such afterwards in your various requests isn't the proper way to go. If you, as the upstream, would like to take over, you should work with the existing maintainers and discuss (co-)maintainership. If it's also about setting a more appropriate name for the package (e.g. with the `catppuccin-` prefix), it should be clearly stated in the request as well which, on its own, is a more legitimate reason for deletion than stating that you would like the package you just created to become the new 'official' one for everyone. Basically, despite being upstream, we would have appreciated if those requests were done more collaboratively by contacting the maintainers of the "original" Catppuccin AUR packages and/or the AUR staff. Regardless, we once again understand your desire of unification for the Catppuccin packages and we are starting this discussion to decide how to go forward with this together. Please, give us a list of the packages you'd like to take over and specify if you want/need a rename for them. The current maintainers of the said packages should be contacted (either with a comment on the AUR Website or via email) to inform them of your intentions and, ideally, to get their approval. Thanks in advance! [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Aur_requests#Rules_of_submission -- Regards, Robin Candau / Antiz