[aur-general] Please delete a lot of packages

Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkovsky at gmail.com
Fri Sep 10 08:38:25 EDT 2010

On 10 September 2010 13:09, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Det <nimetonmaili at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/9/10, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Deleted xorg-server-gentoo; will go through the songbird mess now.
>>> I've only deleted songbird-nightly-latest, the rest seem fine to keep
>>> (i.e.: they have maintainers, were updated within a year and have
>>> enough votes).
>> Ok, thank you but 'songbird' and 'songbird-svn' are the same package
>> so the other one should be removed - with the addition that
>> 'songbird-svn's PKGBUILD works better.
>> 'songbird-nightly' and 'songbird-nightly-bin' are also the same
>> package - with the addition that 'songbird-auto-nightly' is always up
>> to date as it automatically checks for the latest nightly version.
>> Sure, they do have a lot of votes but that's just because they've been
>> around for so long, while 'songbird-auto-nightly' was created less
>> than a month ago.
>>        Det
> Sorry, I'm having a hard time deciding what goes and what stays.
> If another TU wants to jump in and handle this request, please do.

Wow, what a mess.

For now I would certainly leave the songbird-svn. It has correct name
and it seems to be quite good PKGBUILD.

I'd prefer if the songbird-auto-nightly was renamed to the
songbird-nightly-bin and then removed.

I think songbird should be removed, because it's in fact the same as
songbird-svn. I don't see any reason to keep it because it seems that
they do not release any source tarballs. However it has just too much
votes to remove it.


More information about the aur-general mailing list