I disagree with this merge request. Here's the current situation: There are currently 6 AUR packages for Google Antigravity: - antigravity-bin (13 votes, most popular) - antigravity-bin-hardened (2 votes, specialized variant) - google-antigravity-bin (2 votes, *mine*) - antigravity-preview (0 votes) - antigravity-binary (0 votes) - antigravity (0 votes, *requester's package*) The `-bin` suffix is standard AUR practice for binary packages. The requester's package name "antigravity" without suffix is actually the non-standard one. The requester's package (antigravity) has critical issues: - *Outdated* (v1.11.2 vs current v1.11.5) - *Broken binary symlink* (points to capital-A "Antigravity" which doesn't exist) - *Not* maintained (last updated Nov 18, now Nov 22) - Zero votes, indicating no user adoption. google-antigravity-bin is: - Correctly structured and functional - Following proper naming conventions - Actively maintained (I'm updating to 1.11.5 after this is resolved) The most popular package (antigravity-bin with 13 votes) also uses the `-bin` suffix, confirming this is the accepted convention. If consolidation is desired, it should be around the most popular and correctly- named packages (antigravity-bin or google-antigravity-bin), not the broken, unmaintained "antigravity" package with zero adoption. The requester should orphan their package, not request others merge into it. The request should be rejected. Given the fragmentation (6 packages doing more or less the same thing), I propose: 1. Keep the two legitimate -bin packages: - antigravity-bin (most popular, 13 votes) - google-antigravity-bin (my package, proper Google branding) 2. Keep specialized variants: - antigravity-bin-hardened (serves specific security use case) 3. Orphan/remove broken/duplicate packages: - antigravity (broken, unmaintained) - antigravity-preview (outdated, unclear purpose[Suggests preview but fetches from the same source as per its PKGBUILD]) - antigravity-binary (duplicate of -bin packages) I'm willing to orphan my package in favor of antigravity-bin IF the community prefers consolidation around that name. However, merging into a broken package makes no sense. On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 at 02:18, <notify@aur.archlinux.org> wrote:

AlphaLynx [1] filed a request to merge google-antigravity-bin [2] into antigravity [3]:

Duplicate with wrong naming

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/AlphaLynx/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/google-antigravity-bin/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/antigravity/