[aur-general] [PRQ#1089] Orphan Request for mingw-w64-readline

Anatol Pomozov anatol.pomozov at gmail.com
Mon Oct 13 19:45:45 UTC 2014


On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 8:22 AM, xantares 09 <xantares09 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> To: aur-requests at archlinux.org
>> Subject: [PRQ#1089] Orphan Request for mingw-w64-readline
>> CC: pingplug at foxmail.com; xantares09 at hotmail.com
>> From: notify at aur.archlinux.org
>> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 14:04:53 +0000
>> pingplug [1] filed a orphan request for mingw-w64-readline [2]:
>> readline has not been updated for a long time.
>> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/pingplug/
>> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/mingw-w64-readline/
> @pingplug: you could have dropped me a mail, I tend to answer it
> @tus, since when "has not been updated for a long time" is a valid reason for orphaning ?

Yes, long out-of-date package is a perfect reason for orphaning. There
are of course valid reasons like newer version is completely broken
and upstream did not provide fix, but in this case maintainer should
tell it on AUR package page.

Package maintenance is a responsibility not a privilege. The
maintainer suppose to follow Arch packaging best practices. Some of
these practices are react on reported issues, keep package file simple
and clean, keep it up-to-date. If current maintainer fails to follow
these practices then it is ok for others to file an orphan request.

> ps: I know this one is not up to date, i did not update it because this one is rather sensitive and I prefered to get same version as mingw-readline from fedora.

Arch is not Fedora. Why would you want to keep there same version?

More information about the aur-general mailing list