[aur-general] About orphaning all packages of inactive users

Maxime GAUDUIN alucryd at gmail.com
Thu Jul 18 19:09:11 EDT 2013

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Alexander Rødseth <rodseth at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thank you for the comments, appreciate it!
> About causing panic when orphaning: the package will continue to be
> available and work even if it's orphaned, but now there is a chance
> that someone will pick up the thread where the previous maintainer
> left of and improve and update the PKGBUILD. If someone panics from
> this, perhaps it's still a good trade?
> The reason I'm asking is because I suspect that I'm more fond of
> cleaning up old cruft than the average TU/Dev, and I don't wish to
> orphan or delete packages in a way that is perceived as rash.
> In my opinion, being relatively quick to orphan, but hesitant to
> delete, should result in a better AUR repository for everyone, as long
> as the criterions for disowning packages is somewhat conservative. I
> would say a user being inactive for more than a year is quite
> sufficient.
> A comment from another TU or Dev would be especially helpful.
> --
> Sincerely,
>   Alexander Rødseth
>   xyproto / TU

I support this too. Orphaning is reversible and will most (preferably
always :P) of the time lead to an improvement of the PKGBUILD, I see no
reason not to do it when the user is clearly inactive. As for deletions, I
would also tend to delete old stuff more easily, but I understand and
respect the wish to keep placeholders in the AUR.


More information about the aur-general mailing list