[PRQ#41221] Deletion Request for jami-qt-wtf
yochananmarqos [1] filed a deletion request for jami-qt-wtf [2]: Duplicate of jami-qt community package. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/yochananmarqos/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/jami-qt-wtf/
NO DELETE The upstream community package had been broken for almost half a year. I put a LOT of effort into making this work. Please do not delete my hard work. ------- Original Message ------- On Saturday, April 29th, 2023 at 11:59 PM, notify@aur.archlinux.org <notify@aur.archlinux.org> wrote:
yochananmarqos [1] filed a deletion request for jami-qt-wtf [2]:
Duplicate of jami-qt community package.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/yochananmarqos/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/jami-qt-wtf/
On 23/05/01 02:34PM, jahway603 wrote:
NO DELETE
The upstream community package had been broken for almost half a year. I put a LOT of effort into making this work. Please do not delete my hard work.
I understand that its frustrating to put in a lot of work and then having it deleted, but the package is a duplicate of a package in [community] and therefore it wasnt even allowed to be submitted in the first place as per the AUR Submission Guidelines[0]: The submitted PKGBUILDs must not build applications already in any of the official binary repositories under any circumstances. Check the official package database for the package. If any version of it exists, do not submit the package. If the official package is out-of-date, flag it as such. If the official package is broken or is lacking a feature, then please file a bug report. Considering this, is there any reason to keep the PKGBUILDs in the AUR? cheers, chris [0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Rules_of_submissi...
Request #41221 has been Accepted by gromit [1]: [Autogenerated] Accepted deletion for jami-qt-wtf. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/gromit/
participants (3)
-
Christian Heusel
-
jahway603
-
notify＠aur.archlinux.org