Search results for "Deletion request for pkgbase" - Aur-requests

[PRQ#47419] Deletion Request for cherrytree-bin

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for cherrytree-bin [2]: This is a badly maintained package. Earler, owner updated it to 1.0.0 without adjusting the dependencies accordingly. I left a detailed feedback in a comment, listing all the needed changes, backing it up with the output of a namcap analysis. Then, instead of fixing the dependencies, owner just downgraded the package to 0.99.37 without bumping the epoch. In addition, owner chose to make the PKGBUILD extract the tarball directly into the $pkgdir, keeping the upstream files' ownership and access attributes. I don't think it is useful to keep this on AUR. Arch maintainers competently take care of the package for this in extra repo, which is on the latest upstream version (not even 1.0.0 but 1.0.1 as of now, released on August 25th, 2023). [a] [a]: https://archlinux.org/packages/?q=cherrytree [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/cherrytree-bin/

2 years, 3 months

Re: [PRQ#59285] Deletion Request for neovim-symlinks

by Marcell Meszaros

On 18 April 2024 20:45:34 GMT+02:00, Doug Newgard <dnewgard(a)outlook.com> wrote: >On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 18:37:46 +0000 >notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > >> MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for neovim-symlinks [2]: >> >> This shim package is an inferior, less compatible >> duplicate of AUR/neovim-drop-in [a], which >> has existed for much longer than this one. >> >> [a]: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/neovim-drop-in >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/neovim-symlinks/ > >If you check the git history, you'll see that everything you've said here is >wrong. It was mistakenly deleted at one point, which makes the dates on the >site wrong, and we don't want to go through all of that again. In any case, it seems enough to keep AUR/neovim-drop-in.

1 year, 8 months

Re: [PRQ#57560] Deletion Request for kate-root

by dreieck

If broken please report in the comments, that is what they are for; I actually have fixed it recently. I maintain the package, and I use and need it. "totally unneeded" I want to refute, since "official" kate refuses to run as root (and for me also under sudo!). If you thin "totally uneeded", please argue why. With the recent change to Qt6/ kf6 I have not followed yet, since it is a major change and I am at travel now and do not want to break my system with a major upgrade. I will come back to it later. Please do not accept the deletion request. On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 23:19:40 +0000, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for kate-root [2]: > > Currenty broken. But also completely unneeded. > > Repo's kate fully supports prompting the user for root write access, > and also can open files via the admin:// protocol (if extra/kio-admin > package is installed). > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/kate-root/

1 year, 9 months

Re: [PRQ#45600] Deletion Request for gamejolt-client

by Marcell Meszaros

@yochananmarqos, please don't turn to such draconian measures. It's not the maintainer's fault that the GameJolt provider arbitrarily changes their shitty download URL. And this new package was created because I suggested/requested that the earlier package, gamejolt-client-bin-aur be renamed, because that name is both nonconformant to AUR naming rules, and also the '-aur' suffix is irrelevant. This is a closed-source application, so maintainer renamed and resubmitted their earlier package as 'gamejolt-client', and initiated an AUR merge (see PRQ#45586.) Let the maintainer update the source URL, don't go for the nuclear option within the first minute. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding. Marcell (MarsSeed) On 29 July 2023 20:20:50 GMT+02:00, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >yochananmarqos [1] filed a deletion request for gamejolt-client [2]: > >Please don't add non-functional packages to the AUR. >See the comments and address the issues before this deletion request >comes up in the queue. If the issues are addressed in the meantime, >I'll close this request. > >[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/yochananmarqos/ >[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/gamejolt-client/

2 years, 4 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#7949] Deletion Request for scalafmt

by Diego Alvarez Zuluaga

Although latest release is v0.6.8 https://github.com/scalameta/scalafmt/releases/tag/v0.6.8 and Upstream URL now is http://scalameta.org/scalafmt/ instead of https://olafurpg.github.io/scalafmt/ Thanks On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 8:52 AM Diego Alvarez Zuluaga < diego.alvarez.zuluaga(a)gmail.com> wrote: > OMG I'm so sorry, I thought it was a feedback request for the maintainer. > Sorry about that > > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017, 7:55 AM Christian Krause < > christian.krause(a)mailbox.org> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> First of all, there is no version 0.6.8 for **scalafmt**, the latest one >> is 0.6.3 and the AUR version is up to date. >> >> Secondly, why use a deletion request for this? >> >> Best Regards >> >> >> On 04/17/2017 06:42 PM, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >> > d1egoaz [1] filed a deletion request for scalafmt [2]: >> > >> > Could you please update to latest scalafmtv 0.6.8 >> > >> > thank you >> > >> > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/d1egoaz/ >> > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/scalafmt/ >> >> >>

8 years, 8 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#26485] Deletion Request for audacity-3.0.2

by Fabio Loli

Il 18/06/21 21:11, notify--- via aur-requests ha scritto: > yochananmarqos [1] filed a deletion request for audacity-3.0.2 [2]: > > "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. > > https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Rules_of_submiss… > > Also the pkgver should not be in the pkgname. It should have been > called audacity3, for example. > > [1]https://aur.archlinux.org/account/yochananmarqos/ > [2]https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/audacity-3.0.2/ audacity in the repo (2.x branch) is flagged OOD since a year, uploading audacity-3.0.2 was intentional since that version actually builds and upstream is changing the build introducing conan and audacity-git is broke at the moment

4 years, 6 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#2403] Deletion Request for ptscotch-mpich

by George Eleftheriou

You are right, i apologize for my urge to file a deletion request. I am sending you a new PKGBUILD as a proposal to update the existing ptscotch-mpich On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Jed Brown <jed(a)jedbrown.org> wrote: > Please create a "scotch-mpich" before trying to delete this. The "scotch" > package is for Open MPI, which is not compatible and has major open bugs in > one-sided (with bug reports and test cases for ~10 years now), so is not an > option for a class of applications. That is why I maintain both variants. > > > On February 16, 2015 4:49:53 PM GMT+09:00, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >> >> eleftg [1] filed a deletion request for ptscotch-mpich [2]: >> >> because: >> -- it's long been out of date >> -- i have packaged a new unified scotch which includes all flavours >> (parallel, serial, mumps) needed by any other AUR package depending on >> it >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/eleftg/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/ptscotch-mpich/ >> >>

10 years, 10 months

[PRQ#58241] Deletion Request for python-markuppy

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

TrialnError [1] filed a deletion request for python-markuppy [2]: Upstream is long time inactive with the latest release being from 2017. In 2020 I only added this package to the aurweb, because it was deleted from the Arch repos but was needed as a dep for python- tablib[0]. This was changed by an upstream release[1] and I think this package can and should go, as it didn't see updates in a long time (not following current python meta in regards to packaging and such), replacements are available (e.g. ElementTree) and no package available on the aurweb is using it. Additionally no votes or comments. If there were a slight change of adoption I would simply drop it, but there is no sign in that regard. _____________ [0] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/python-tablib [1] https://github.com/jazzband/tablib/releases/tag/v3.6.0 [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/TrialnError/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/python-markuppy/

1 year, 8 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#4870] Deletion Request for vulkan

by Eric Engeström

Hi all, This request has been rejected by Muflone, and I don't quite understand; is there a reason to keep these packages around? I'm pretty sure my packages in the AUR have been superseded by Laurent Carlier's (lcarlier/lordheavy) in [extra], and can only confuse users. Cheers, Eric On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:45 AM, <notify(a)aur.archlinux.org> wrote: > 1ace [1] filed a deletion request for vulkan [2]: > > extra/vulkan-sdk & extra/vulkan-icd-loader replace these vulkan-sdk & > vulkan-loader. > > Not sure what to do about the different name though; should I push an > update with the new name (vulkan-icd-loader) and `replaces=(vulkan- > loader)` to make those who installed my package use the new name, and > in a week (when hopefully people have upgraded to the new name) > actually delete this one? > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/1ace/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/vulkan/ >

9 years, 9 months

Re: [PRQ#59704] Deletion Request for element-desktop-deb-package

by André M. Wollmarker

This package will be updated as soon as I receive an EOL message. It is 100% based on the deb package from the original developers and thus minimises some of the problems I and others have with the Arch package. It is therefore not incorrectly labelled. Deb is in the name and is referred to in the description. So it definitely has benefits. Am Sonntag, 28. April 2024, 11:40:26 MESZ schrieben Sie: > MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for element-desktop-deb-package > [2]: > > Unneeded. Exists in Arch extra repo. [a] > > Less frequently updated than the repo package. > Has wrong pkgname. > > There's absolutely zero benefit in keeping it on AUR. > > [a]: > https://archlinux.org/packages/?q=element-desktop > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/element-desktop-deb-package/

1 year, 7 months

Aur-requests search results for query "Deletion request for pkgbase"