On 23/06/30 08:40AM, Arvedui wrote:

I think this can still be usefull and should not be deleted.

Whats the usecase? As far as I can tell there is a python3 variant of this module ... cheers, gromit

That kind of reasoning makes sense for the official repositories where (binary)packages are distributed and there is a non trivial cost associated with that distribution. The AUR is mostly about sharing PKGBUILDs and the cost of having a PKGBUILD on the AUR is basically non existing and is mostly payed by me in terms of the time I spent maintaining it or defending its existence. So even if no one is using this, what harm does this do that warrants removing? On 2023-07-02 17:27:40, Marcell Meszaros wrote:

+1 for @gromit's observation.

As this is a Python2 library, to be consumed by other Python2 packages, I see no need to keep it on AUR. Because nothing depends on it.

On 2 July 2023 17:20:15 GMT+02:00, Christian Heusel <christian@heusel.eu> wrote:

...

On 23/06/30 08:40AM, Arvedui wrote:

...

I think this can still be usefull and should not be deleted.

Whats the usecase? As far as I can tell there is a python3 variant of this module ...

cheers, gromit

On 2023-07-09 15:46:04, Marcell Meszaros wrote:

AUR submission guidelines state the following [a]:

“• Make sure the package you want to upload is useful. Will anyone else want to use this package? Is it extremely specialized? If more than a few people would find this package useful, it is appropriate for submission.”

Python2 is EOL since 2 years and is generally unsupported. The 'taskw' python bindings has dropped compatibility since May 2022. There won't be any further updates coming from upstream for the Python2 legacy version.

Just because something is unsupported by upstream does not mean that nobody is using it or that it is not useful, that goes for languages as well as for libraries.

Also python2-taskw does not have any dependents on AUR, even though it should be consumed by other Python applications/libraries.

Installing a library for a local script that is not in a package is a very valid use case in my opinion. I do that all the time.

Also this package is broken, because it does not declare its mandatory dependency ('task' package built from taskwarrior source).

That is hardly a reason to delete something, you could have made a comment for that. Thanks for pointing that out.

Last two user comments, from 2021 and 2022 respectively, just requested the python2 subpackage from the formerly dual Py2/Py3 package to be removed or split out. In essence, both users wanted to use only the python3 package, and you have implemented this requested separation.

I don't think comment activity is a good indicator for the usefulness of a package. If a package is working well nobody will make a comment. The missing dependency in this case is probably not noticed because most people also use the cli provided by taskwarrior.

So now this Python2 package has no users apart from you maybe, and no packages that rely on it.

The guidelines do not require that it is actually used, only that "people would find this package useful". And the latter point is not relevant in my opinion as mentioned above.

Hi Marcel, Thank you for your detailed response. Now I understand your reasons to keep this package. I see that the following point is especially relevant to the use case of taskwarrior and its Python2/3 bindings:

Installing a library for a local script that is not in a package is a very valid use case in my opinion. I do that all the time.

I will cancel my deletion requests pertaining to this package and its dependency python2-kitchen. Thanks again for taking the time to explain your view and insight about this package, and sorry if my lack thereof might have caused you concern and hassle. Cheers, Marcell (MarsSeed) On 9 July 2023 16:38:27 GMT+02:00, "Marcel Röthke" <marcel.roethke@posteo.de> wrote:

On 2023-07-09 15:46:04, Marcell Meszaros wrote:

...

AUR submission guidelines state the following [a]:

“• Make sure the package you want to upload is useful. Will anyone else want to use this package? Is it extremely specialized? If more than a few people would find this package useful, it is appropriate for submission.”

Python2 is EOL since 2 years and is generally unsupported. The 'taskw' python bindings has dropped compatibility since May 2022. There won't be any further updates coming from upstream for the Python2 legacy version.

Just because something is unsupported by upstream does not mean that nobody is using it or that it is not useful, that goes for languages as well as for libraries.

...

Also python2-taskw does not have any dependents on AUR, even though it should be consumed by other Python applications/libraries.

Installing a library for a local script that is not in a package is a very valid use case in my opinion. I do that all the time.

...

Also this package is broken, because it does not declare its mandatory dependency ('task' package built from taskwarrior source).

That is hardly a reason to delete something, you could have made a comment for that. Thanks for pointing that out.

...

Last two user comments, from 2021 and 2022 respectively, just requested the python2 subpackage from the formerly dual Py2/Py3 package to be removed or split out. In essence, both users wanted to use only the python3 package, and you have implemented this requested separation.

I don't think comment activity is a good indicator for the usefulness of a package. If a package is working well nobody will make a comment. The missing dependency in this case is probably not noticed because most people also use the cli provided by taskwarrior.

...

So now this Python2 package has no users apart from you maybe, and no packages that rely on it.

The guidelines do not require that it is actually used, only that "people would find this package useful". And the latter point is not relevant in my opinion as mentioned above.