[aur-general] XFlux Ownership

[gadget3000]

I assumed you were a user of the package and you couldn't get it to build
so I just updated the package so you could build it and thought nothing of
it.
I'm not great at replying to emails so my bad I guess :)


On 9 April 2013 18:38, Ike Devolder <ike.devolder at gmail.com> wrote:

> Op dinsdag 9 april 2013 14:31:08 schreef gadget3000:
> > Ok thanks. Just for the record that was one of the things I fixed when
> > I updated the package, but oh well.
> >
> > Gadget3000
> >
> > On 9 April 2013 14:27, Felix Yan <felixonmars at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, April 09, 2013 14:23:12 gadget3000 wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm the previous maintainer of the xflux package (
> > > > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xflux/).
> > > > Over the past 24 hours someone else has become the maintainer of
> > > > the
> > > > package but I'm confused as to how because I never gave up
> > > > "ownership" of it.
> > > > Before I go on I just want to clarify that I'm not so bothered
> > > > about
> > > > getting the package back so much as understanding how someone else
> > > > now maintains the package without my knowledge (I only found out
> > > > after doing>
> > > a
> > >
> > > > system, update an seeing that that package got updated even though
> > > > I
> > >
> > > didn't
> > >
> > > > update the version number).
> > > >
> > > > Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the only way a maintainer
> > > > can be forced to give up a package is if someone sends an email
> > > > to the>
> > > maintainer,
> > >
> > > > asking them to update the package and the maintainer does not
> > > > respond
> > > > (either by email or by updating the package). I received an email
> > >
> > > yesterday
> > >
> > > > (8th March) asking me to update the package, because it didn't
> > > > build
> > >
> > > since
> > >
> > > > the makepkg update, and I updated the package. Even if I hadn't
> > > > updated>
> > > it,
> > >
> > > > it had been less than 24 hours since I even got the message so I
> > > > don't understand why someone else has now taken over the package.
> > > >
> > > > So my question is does anyone know how I lost the package?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Gadget3000
> > >
> > > FYI,
> > >
> > > https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2013-April/02306
> > > 8.html
> > >
> > > Felix Yan
> > > Twitter: @felixonmars
>
> Just a small note, since i noticed you were not all that inactive i've
> also sent you a mail. Why did you not respond to it, then the package
> would'nt been orphaned at all.
>
> --
> Ike
>
> ps: for all the thunderbird users out there, i know my signature will
> not be valid. please use something that works like mutt, claws mail,
> kmail, whatever.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ike Devolder <ike.devolder at gmail.com>
> To: gadget3000 at msn.com
> Cc:
> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 07:56:23 +0100
> Subject: archlinux aur xflux
> Dear gadget3000,
>
> Could you please update your xflux package to the AUR packaging
> standards. There is an orphan request for this package but I see you are
> fairly active so i leave the choice with you. If you are no longer
> interested in the xflux package, orphan it yourself or take a note of the
> comments given for improving the pkgbuild.
>
> thx
> --
> Ike
>
> ps: for all the thunderbird users out there, i know my signature will
> not be valid. please use something that works like mutt, claws mail,
> kmail, whatever.
>