[aur-general] Please delete a lot of packages

[Lukáš Jirkovský]

On 12 September 2010 00:39, Philipp Überbacher <hollunder at lavabit.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Det's message of 2010-09-11 19:36:05 +0200:
>> On 9/10/10, Lukáš Jirkovský <l.jirkovsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 10 September 2010 13:09, Evangelos Foutras <foutrelis at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> 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.
>> >
>> > Lukas
>> >
>>
>> Jesus, well the nicest thing to do then would be to first replace
>> "songbird-nightly" with "songbird-auto-nightly" and _then_ delete:
>> "songbird", "songbird-auto-nightly" and "songbird-nightly-bin".
>>
>> "Songbird" does indeed have a lot of votes, which is just too bad, but
>> if "the binary version of Songbird" has to be "songbird-bin", then
>> "the SVN version of Songbird" has to also be "songbird-svn"... unless
>> that logic would need the developers to release a versioned source
>> too... which they don't.
>>
>>      Chrissake,
>>      Det
>
> I know little about it, but if I'm not wrong, songbird for linux isn't
> developed anymore? So what does it matter?
> --
> Philipp
>
> --
> "Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu
> und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan
>
>

It seems you're right. It should be replaced by Nightingale
(http://getnightingale.com/), Songbird's fork.