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

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#19650] Deletion Request for asf-ui

by Gilrain

Hi, I'm the maintainer of the asf-ui package (and its parent asf). I would support the original request made by trbn1 to rename the package as -git, if it's truly necessary. Duplicating what is already a git package under a different name would only waste everyones time. FYI, there hasn't been an official release of asf-ui, it's purely a git software. Le 22/07/2020 à 19:35, Justin Kromlinger a écrit : > Instead of deleting this package I would recommend creating a new > package from the git sources and pushing it to asf-ui-git and a > successive merge request. trbn1 would you like to do that and adopt the > package? > > On Sat, 06 Jun 2020 16:34:15 +0000 > notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > >> trbn1 [1] filed a deletion request for asf-ui [2]: >> >> This package tracks git master branch so it's missing a -git suffix. >> Package name should be asf-ui-git >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/trbn1/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/asf-ui/ -- Gilrain

5 years, 4 months

[PRQ#49030] Deletion Request for android-sdk-platform-tools-dummy

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for android-sdk-platform-tools- dummy [2]: Dummy packages are not useful to provide to a package manager, and they are not allowed on AUR. Having a dummy package installed defeats the purpose of using a package manager. If a package requires another package, there's a good reason for it, and both should be installed in the system for them to work. No one forces anyone to install Android IDE's and Android SDK's / platform tools they use for development into the system. They can live happily inside the user's home folder as well. In that case, the user is not using pacman to manage those installations. If an AUR package requires Android SDK platform tools, both should be managed by the package manager. Developers have to ensure that they have sufficient storage space on their system for their particular developer activity, and disk space is not that expensive nowadays. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/android-sdk-platform-tools-dummy/

2 years, 2 months

[aur-requests] [PRQ#10538] Deletion Request for gsmartcontrol-svn

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

starfry [1] filed a deletion request for gsmartcontrol-svn [2]: Hi, I got the below sent to me regarding a pkg I have in AUR. I guess it should be deleted as per the request. I believe that requires a mail to this list? https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gsmartcontrol-svn/ I verified [1] the sender's address is indeed the upstream developer. thanks. [1] https://gsmartcontrol.sourceforge.io/home/index.php/Support -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Please remove gsmartcontrol-svn package Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 16:26:28 +0400 From: Alexander Shaduri <ashaduri(a)gmail.com> To: archlinux(a)jelmail.com Hi, I'm the developer of GSmartControl and I see there is an Arch package of gsmartcontrol-svn here: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gsmartcontrol-svn/ Could you please remove this package? I keep getting bug reports for it, but the thing is, the SVN version is not intended for public consumption at all. It may not build, may not run, may destroy your data, etc... Plus, it's in the middle of active rewrite/refactoring right now and is in no state to be even compiled. Thanks, Alexander [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/starfry/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/gsmartcontrol-svn/

7 years, 10 months

[PRQ#51466] Deletion Request for otf-literata

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

toropisco [1] filed a deletion request for otf-literata [2]: Hi, in the light of the recent harassment by xiota, I as the package maintainer request this package be removed from the repository. I have two main reasons: 1. The fonts are proprietary and have not been updated in several years, as Google has focused its resources on developing the TrueType variable version for at least 5 years now. It was a good idea when there was no OFL licensed TrueType fonts. That's not the case anymore. 2. TrueType and Postscript font rendering are way to different both on screen and print to have people shot their feet by installing both versions. 3. I'm too old to deal with teenage drama. Whoever wants to grab a copy of the OTF fonts, can grab an upstream APK from one of the gazillion pirate sites in the internet and extract the fonts themselves. As a preemtive move, I have already locked out the upsteam source used by the PKGBUILD. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/toropisco/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/otf-literata/

2 years, 1 month

[PRQ#47021] Deletion Request for python-pillow95

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for python-pillow95 [2]: This package is not a functional equivalent of repo's python-pillow 10.0.0, but it cannot coexist with that. It can break packages that use API elements of Pillow that have changed in that latest version. (Pillow uses a one-year API deprecation schedule; some elements marked deprecated since Pillow 9.2 from 1-Jul-2022 were removed in Pillow 10.0.0 released on 1-Jul-2023.) This build was created for one package: AUR/weewx. There is a one-line patch for weewx from upstream that makes it compatible with pillow 10.0.0. (One relevant constant was renamed in Pillow code.) Mentioned and linked the patch to weewx's maintainer on 2023-08-30. It is not useful to keep this package in this situation. And it is not a good approach to replace repo packages with non-compatible legacy variants for one AUR package's sake, when simpler and narrower-scoped solutions exist to make that specific problematic package work with repo dependencies. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/python-pillow95/

2 years, 3 months

Re: [PRQ#48376] Deletion Request for python2-bintrees

by Marcell Meszaros

Hi Sergej, Thank you for your response. On AUR, package owners cannot effect technical acceptance or rejection of submitted requests. But - TLDR - if you agree to the deletion, you can file a new deletion request as maintainer (and in that case, keep ownership of the package). Maintainers' requests can get priority treatment by Trusted Users. They can list such as a separate category on AURweb. It is helpful for them, as those submissions bear stronger credence as to the validity and reasonability of the proposed action. Regular requests submitted by people other the maintainer typically have much longer waiting time before they get acted upon. (Currently around 2.5 month.) Cheers, Marcell (MarsSeed) On 7 October 2023 10:39:28 GMT+02:00, sergej <sergej(a)msgpeek.net> wrote: >On 10/3/23 14:58, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >> MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for python2-bintrees [2]: >> >> This Python2 library is not used by any other pkg, so I propose >> deletion. >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/python2-bintrees/ > >Hi all, > >pkg maintainer here. If this helps to speed up the process: I agree with the deletion request and the reasoning behind it. > >I'd rather see it deleted rather than orphaned. But I can also just disown it. Is there a proper process to follow in this case? [0] doesn't explicitly mention if and how pkg owner should react. > >Best regards, >Sergej > > >[0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Deletion >

2 years, 2 months

Re: [PRQ#41522] Deletion Request for hvl_replay-kode54-git

by Matti Niemenmaa

On 21/05/2023 04.09, Christopher Snowhill (kode54) wrote: >> On May 20, 2023, at 8:48 AM, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: >> >> Deewiant [1] filed a deletion request for hvl_replay-kode54-git [2]: >> >> Upstream is gone and I can't find even a fork of it anywhere. > > Oh, damn, this needed my combo hvl plugin source. Do you still need the original with the revision history for the hvl replay source? I can prune its repo to just that source and push it somewhere. Nah it's okay, HivelyTracker upstream seems to be maintained well enough and I already went to the trouble of cooking up libhvl-git to wrap that into a usable form. The end result isn't quite API or ABI compatible but it's good enough for me. >> Instead of reviving it in its original form, I packaged libhvl-git as >> an alternative. >> >> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Deewiant/ >> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/hvl_replay-kode54-git/

2 years, 6 months

[aur-requests] [PRQ#36399] Deletion Request for check50

by notify＠aur.archlinux.org

MayorBender [1] filed a deletion request for check50 [2]: This package should be deleted for two reasons. The first is that it's already easily install-able through the Package Installer for Python (pip) here: https://pypi.org/project/check50/ The second is that its dependencies conflict with what's provided by Arch repos. For example, it depends on pyyaml version >=3.10,<6. This conflicts with the upstream version of pyyaml, which is 6.0 and is the one the Arch repos provide. Meaning the AUR installed version will fail to run and the user will have to install it through pip anyways. Note: I maintain all AUR packages related to CS50. I tried to find a reasonable way to keep this package up to date in the AUR but considering the dependency conflicts, it no longer makes sense to keep it in the AUR. I will continue to maintain packages related to CS50 that make sense to maintain, such as the libcs50 & libcs50-git packages since they are not easily install-able elsewhere nor do they have annoying dependency conflicts. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MayorBender/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/check50/

3 years, 5 months

Re: [aur-requests] [PRQ#15875] Deletion Request for python-semantic_version

by brent s.

On 9/1/19 10:29 AM, notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > sl1pkn07 [1] filed a deletion request for python-semantic_version [2]: > > in [community] > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/sl1pkn07/ > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/python-semantic_version/ > AUR maintainer for python-semantic_version here - wow, something got goofed here! I think it was adopted into [community] without it being removed from AUR. My last update[0] was 2017-11-24. The package was added to [community] on 2017-12-06[1] but I never made a new commit to "re-create" the AUR pkg or anything (as git history shows)... Is that AUR removal process automatic or manual? If it's automatic, does it warrant an auditing of other possible packages that were missed in this fashion? Regardless, thank you Felix for adopting and moving to [community]! I'll second the motion that it should be removed from AUR. I had no idea it made it to [community]! [0] https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/log/?h=python-semantic_version [1] https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/log/trunk?h=packages/pytho… -- brent saner https://square-r00t.net/ GPG info: https://square-r00t.net/gpg-info

6 years, 3 months

Re: [PRQ#40704] Deletion Request for font-awesome-6

by Mark Wagie

font-awesome has been in the community repo for years: https://archlinux.org/packages/community/any/font-awesome/ Sent with Proton Mail secure email. ------- Original Message ------- On Monday, March 20th, 2023 at 7:48 PM, Anirudh Konduru <anirudhmkonduru(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > There doesn't seem to be a ttf-font-awesome / otf-font-awesome > community package. The existing packages > (ttf-font-awesome-5/otf-font-awesome-5 and > ttf-font-awesome-4/otf-font-awesome-4) are meant to stay at their > respective major versions. > > The maintainer of the ttf-font-awesome-5 provides some justification > as to why this is the way it is: > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-font-awesome-5#comment-851649 > > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:31 AM notify(a)aur.archlinux.org wrote: > > > yochananmarqos [1] filed a deletion request for font-awesome-6 [2]: > > > > Duplicate of ttf-font-awesome / otf-font-awesome community package. > > > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/yochananmarqos/ > > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/font-awesome-6/

2 years, 8 months

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