[PRQ#42786] Deletion Request for autopsy-bin
a821 [1] filed a deletion request for autopsy-bin [2]: Duplicated of 'autopsy'. Also, it's been flagged for a year and 'autopsy' seems to be maintained. This is a java application so the suffix '-bin' is not necessary anyway. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/a821/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/autopsy-bin/
Request #42786 has been Rejected by yan12125 [1]:
This is a java application so the suffix '-bin' is not necessary anyway.
Java packages can be either built from sources or binaries as well. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/yan12125/
@yan12125, why did you reject the deletion request for this duplicate? AUR/autopsy also uses the precompiled Java bytecode as source. So the two packages are truly duplicates, the only difference is that autopsy-bin is 1 year older and flagged OOD for that period. On 30 July 2023 11:05:20 GMT+02:00, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
Request #42786 has been Rejected by yan12125 [1]:
This is a java application so the suffix '-bin' is not necessary anyway.
Java packages can be either built from sources or binaries as well.
Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros@runbox.eu> 於 2023年7月30日 週日 下午6:20寫道：
@yan12125, why did you reject the deletion request for this duplicate?
AUR/autopsy also uses the precompiled Java bytecode as source.
So the two packages are truly duplicates, the only difference is that autopsy-bin is 1 year older and flagged OOD for that period.
On 30 July 2023 11:05:20 GMT+02:00, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
Request #42786 has been Rejected by yan12125 [1]:
This is a java application so the suffix '-bin' is not necessary anyway.
Java packages can be either built from sources or binaries as well.
autopsy-bin is a better package name for a package built from binaries. Therefore, orphaning and updating autospy-bin is better than deleting autospy-bin. After that, autospy can be merged into autospy-bin in case it is not changed to be built from sources. Best, Chih-Hsuan Yen (yan12125)
autopsy-bin is a better package name for a package built from binaries.
In that case, please kindly revise the AUR submission guidelines, because currently it explicitly mentions Java as an exception to the '-bin' name suffix requirement. [a] " * Packages that use prebuilt deliverables, when the sources are available, must use the -bin suffix. An exception to this is with Java. " [a]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Rules_of_submissi... On 30 July 2023 15:26:43 GMT+02:00, Chih-Hsuan Yen <yan12125@archlinux.org> wrote:
Marcell Meszaros <marcell.meszaros@runbox.eu> 於 2023年7月30日 週日 下午6:20寫道：
@yan12125, why did you reject the deletion request for this duplicate?
AUR/autopsy also uses the precompiled Java bytecode as source.
So the two packages are truly duplicates, the only difference is that autopsy-bin is 1 year older and flagged OOD for that period.
On 30 July 2023 11:05:20 GMT+02:00, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
Request #42786 has been Rejected by yan12125 [1]:
This is a java application so the suffix '-bin' is not necessary anyway.
Java packages can be either built from sources or binaries as well.
autopsy-bin is a better package name for a package built from binaries. Therefore, orphaning and updating autospy-bin is better than deleting autospy-bin. After that, autospy can be merged into autospy-bin in case it is not changed to be built from sources.
Best,
Chih-Hsuan Yen (yan12125)
participants (3)
-
Chih-Hsuan Yen
-
Marcell Meszaros
-
notify＠aur.archlinux.org