[aur-requests] [PRQ#1282] Deletion Request for lib32-rtmpdump-stable
GordonGR [1] filed a deletion request for lib32-rtmpdump-stable [2]: This package is duplicate of aur/lib32-rtmpdump [a], maintained by me. Its creator claims (in the comments section of [a]), that his package is stable while mine is the developmental edition, which is not true; the package in [extra] [b] uses git, and therefore [a] mine uses git as well. The same practice is used for other packages, eg the old now gstreamer0.10 packages. There is simply no place for this package, I would go insofar as to say this is high-jacking attempt. Please delete. [a] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lib32-rtmpdump/ [b] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/rtmpdump/ [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/GordonGR/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lib32-rtmpdump-stable/
I am ok with the deletion. But I want to be clear that this is not from git and this is from the website that is the host of the package. And let me also be clear that the claim of a high-jacking attempt has no basis in its aligation. Also my claim as to why I am felt that GordonGR's packgage is from git is because it is using a specific commit. Which is understandably a saved state of a git development, but this does mean that it is still from git. Next time ask me about this because the PKGBUILD's are different. On 10/29/14 08:07, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
GordonGR [1] filed a deletion request for lib32-rtmpdump-stable [2]:
This package is duplicate of aur/lib32-rtmpdump [a], maintained by me. Its creator claims (in the comments section of [a]), that his package is stable while mine is the developmental edition, which is not true; the package in [extra] [b] uses git, and therefore [a] mine uses git as well. The same practice is used for other packages, eg the old now gstreamer0.10 packages. There is simply no place for this package, I would go insofar as to say this is high-jacking attempt. Please delete.
[a] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lib32-rtmpdump/ [b] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/rtmpdump/
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/GordonGR/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lib32-rtmpdump-stable/
I take the high-jacking allegation back. It was improper of me and I
apologise.
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:44:17 -0500
Jake Daffer
I am ok with the deletion. But I want to be clear that this is not from git and this is from the website that is the host of the package. And let me also be clear that the claim of a high-jacking attempt has no basis in its aligation. Also my claim as to why I am felt that GordonGR's packgage is from git is because it is using a specific commit. Which is understandably a saved state of a git development, but this does mean that it is still from git. Next time ask me about this because the PKGBUILD's are different.
On 10/29/14 08:07, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
GordonGR [1] filed a deletion request for lib32-rtmpdump-stable [2]:
This package is duplicate of aur/lib32-rtmpdump [a], maintained by me. Its creator claims (in the comments section of [a]), that his package is stable while mine is the developmental edition, which is not true; the package in [extra] [b] uses git, and therefore [a] mine uses git as well. The same practice is used for other packages, eg the old now gstreamer0.10 packages. There is simply no place for this package, I would go insofar as to say this is high-jacking attempt. Please delete.
[a] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lib32-rtmpdump/ [b] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/rtmpdump/
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/GordonGR/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lib32-rtmpdump-stable/
-- Νῖκος Θεοδώρου «Ἀγεωμέτρητος μηδεὶς εἰσίτω!»
I take the high-jacking allegation back. It was wrong of me and I
apologise.
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:44:17 -0500
Jake Daffer
I am ok with the deletion. But I want to be clear that this is not from git and this is from the website that is the host of the package. And let me also be clear that the claim of a high-jacking attempt has no basis in its aligation. Also my claim as to why I am felt that GordonGR's packgage is from git is because it is using a specific commit. Which is understandably a saved state of a git development, but this does mean that it is still from git. Next time ask me about this because the PKGBUILD's are different.
On 10/29/14 08:07, notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
GordonGR [1] filed a deletion request for lib32-rtmpdump-stable [2]:
This package is duplicate of aur/lib32-rtmpdump [a], maintained by me. Its creator claims (in the comments section of [a]), that his package is stable while mine is the developmental edition, which is not true; the package in [extra] [b] uses git, and therefore [a] mine uses git as well. The same practice is used for other packages, eg the old now gstreamer0.10 packages. There is simply no place for this package, I would go insofar as to say this is high-jacking attempt. Please delete.
[a] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/lib32-rtmpdump/ [b] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/rtmpdump/
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/GordonGR/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/lib32-rtmpdump-stable/
-- Νῖκος Θεοδώρου «Ἀγεωμέτρητος μηδεὶς εἰσίτω!»
* Jake Daffer
Also my claim as to why I am felt that GordonGR's packgage is from git is because it is using a specific commit. Which is understandably a saved state of a git development, but this does mean that it is still from git.
You should only add -git to the package name if you're following a git branch, not a specific version: "Suffix pkgname with -cvs, -svn, -hg, -darcs, -bzr, -git etc. unless the package fetches a specific release." [1] Regards, Marcel [and please don't top-post] [1]https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/VCS_PKGBUILD_Guidelines#Guidelines
Request #1282 has been accepted by arcanis [1]. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/arcanis/
participants (4)
-
Jake Daffer
-
Marcel Korpel
-
notify＠aur.archlinux.org
-
Νῖκος Θεοδώρου