[aur-general] Proposal: Mass AUR Cleanup

Aaron Bull Schaefer aaron at elasticdog.com
Mon Oct 4 15:33:03 EDT 2010

On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Brad Fanella <bradfanella at archlinux.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 03:18:19AM +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
>> Anyway, we cannot mass-orphan them without checking. It is simply not
>> right, no matter the statistics. For example, cutegod [1] is owned by
>> Dragonlord, a TU. He might have his reasons. Like him, many others who
>> are not TUs might have their reasons.
>> Anyway, I consider this more of a TODO.
>> [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=14119
> Well, in most cases, they are flagged out of date for a good reason.
> For example, cutegod no longer has a project page up nor is the actual source available.

Read the first comment on the AUR site for cutegod:

"Comment by: eyecreate on Fri, 06 Aug 2010 13:04:34 +0000
 url/website is now: http://mfgames.com/cutegod/start
 source package is: http://mfgames.com/releases/cutegod/cutegod-0.3.0.tar.bz2"

...so it *does* have a project page and available source code, but the
package should be updated to reflect that.

My $0.02, if a package has been marked out of date and hasn't had any
activity for a long time, I would think it makes more sense to just
contact the maintainers rather than blindly orphaning. There could
definitely be legit reasons for many of them or even mistaken
flaggings. If any of the emails to the maintainers bounce due to an
inaccurate/old email address, then go ahead and orphan them at that
point so someone else can maintain it.

Loui is also right, the discussion period should have started before
the voting period began.

Aaron "ElasticDog" Schaefer

More information about the aur-general mailing list