[aur-general] [PATCH 1/1] TUs can change package names
archlinux at cryptocrack.de
Wed Jun 1 13:20:29 EDT 2011
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:47:16PM +0300, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
> On 1 June 2011 16:04, D. Can Celasun <dcelasun at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Daenyth Blank <daenyth+arch at gmail.com>wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 05:32, Alexander Rødseth <rodseth at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I like both the idea of it being possible to change the names of
> >> > packages and the patch.
> >> > But, what about dependencies? Should they be left dangling?
> >> >
> >> > - Alexander Rødseth
> >> >
> >> This patch leaves the pkgname in the PKGBUILD as the old name.
> >> Probably not an issue, but the maintainer would have to submit an
> >> updated PKGBUILD after the name change.
> > Yeah I thought about that, but when the package name goes from "foo" to
> > "bar", the maintainer might want to add replaces=("foo") etc. So it's
> > probably best to leave it up to the maintainer.
> An idea I wouldn't mind seeing implemented is the ability to transfer
> the votes and comments to another package when deleting the old
> For example, suppose the "foo" package gets a new name, say "bar".
> - Its maintainer uploads a new "bar" package with provides=('foo') and
> conflicts=('foo'). Then, they request the old package to be removed
> and at the same time mention the name of the new package.
> - A TU puts the name (or ID?) of the new package in a box next to the
> delete check box and proceeds to delete it. The votes and comments get
> reassigned to the new package.
+1. If this will ever be implemented, it'll probably work that way.
Merging comments and/or votes is the KISS approach here. Further
implementation details should be discussed on aur-dev, please.
More information about the aur-general