[aur-requests] [PRQ#512] Deletion Request for eggwm
FredBezies [1] filed a deletion request for eggwm [2]: Dead upstream ? No commits since march 2011... [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/FredBezies/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/eggwm/
On 2014-08-16 12:58, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
FredBezies [1] filed a deletion request for eggwm [2]:
Dead upstream ? No commits since march 2011...
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/FredBezies/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/eggwm/
Does it build/work though? Just being inactive for a couple of years doesn't mean that it's not still useful.
Request #512 has been accepted by foutrelis [1]. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/foutrelis/
Am 17.08.2014 um 06:43 schrieb notify@aur.archlinux.org:
Request #512 has been accepted by foutrelis [1].
Package maintainer was a TU and he even re-uploaded the package now. Who is at fault here? FredBezies for requesting? foutrelis for deleting? keenerd for maintaining and re-uploading? best regards, carstene1ns
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 7:39 AM, carstene1ns <arch@carsten-teibes.de> wrote:
Package maintainer was a TU and he even re-uploaded the package now. Who is at fault here? FredBezies for requesting? foutrelis for deleting? keenerd for maintaining and re-uploading?
just to bring it up: ...or google for threading all "request accepted" and "request declined" emails. can't we use the same subject (thread-id?) as the respective request? that would provide a more sensible grouping in whatever email browser you're using... cheers! mar77i
On Sunday 17 August 2014 at 11:18:25, Martti Kühne wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 7:39 AM, carstene1ns <arch@carsten-teibes.de> wrote:
Package maintainer was a TU and he even re-uploaded the package now. Who is at fault here? FredBezies for requesting? foutrelis for deleting? keenerd for maintaining and re-uploading?
just to bring it up: ...or google for threading all "request accepted" and "request declined" emails. can't we use the same subject (thread-id?) as the respective request? that would provide a more sensible grouping in whatever email browser you're using...
cheers! mar77i
The In-Reply-To: header seems to be correctly set on automated emails. Apparently it's gmail web interface to blame. -- Ivan Shapovalov / intelfx /
participants (5)
-
carstene1ns
-
Doug Newgard
-
Ivan Shapovalov
-
Martti Kühne
-
notify＠aur.archlinux.org