[aur-general] Deletion request

Laszlo Papp djszapi at archlinux.us
Tue Nov 10 00:31:49 EST 2009

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 7:29 AM, Chris Brannon <cmbrannon79 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Xyne wrote:
>> General question: If someone were willing to follow through with it,
>> would it be better to enforce the naming guidelines and modify the
>> affected packages, or does it simply not matter? It seems unfortunate
>> that "non-standard" names can get locked in this way.
>> In this case, there are only 3 prosody packages between 2 maintainers.
> In this specific case, the name luaexpat seems to be the correct one,
> although it is aesthetically unappealing.
> It is the name of the source tarball and the tree contained therein.
> Also, the project's URL uses that name (though the page is temporarily
> inaccessible).  I think I made the right choice earlier.
> In the general case, if the package was named incorrectly, it is probably good
> to contact the maintainers of packages that depend on it.
> Regards,
> -- Chris

I agree with both of you here, I think in this special case Chris took
good decision which one was to delete because the 'luaexpat' package
that's the dependencies of more packages in AUR, but Xavier's right
too in that regard so that it would be nice thinking of Packaging
Standards extension (if it's not involved until now) with
recommended/suggested package name in these situation Just see vim-*,
php-*, emacs-*, xemacs-* from the extra/community repository as
samples. I think the unity here too would be a good step.

Best Regards,
Laszlo Papp

More information about the aur-general mailing list