[aur-general] [PRQ#11055] Deletion Request for dnscrypt-proxy-go | [PRQ#11056] Deletion Request for dnscrypt-proxy-go-git

Robin Broda arch-ml at coderobe.net
Wed Apr 4 14:49:50 UTC 2018

On 04/04/2018 04:37 PM, Jordan Glover wrote:
> On April 4, 2018 3:44 PM, Robin Broda via aur-general <aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> On 04/04/2018 02:41 PM, Jordan Glover via aur-general wrote:
>>> Can we get more explanation for this? This isn't a version bump. This project
>>> was rewritten from scratch, the old sources are gone. The PKGBUILD was written
>>> from scratch, packagement solutions were upstreamed[1]. Upstream points
>>> specifically to this package[2]. Archlinux repo maintainer wasn't involved at
>>> all with those and there is no info if he's interested in maintaining the new
>>> v2 version.
>>> [1] https://github.com/jedisct1/dnscrypt-proxy/commit/fa2c95084ef9b575bfbe62543e0765623c9b8a0e
>>> [2] https://github.com/jedisct1/dnscrypt-proxy/wiki/Installation-ArchLinux
>>> Jordan
>> It's got the same name, is written by the same author, and the versions
>> begin at 2.0.0. Fwiw this is just a major version bump of the same
>> package - it doesn't really matter what percentage of it has changed
>> since the last version.
> So when it doesn't share any code, doesn't share code repository and doesn't
> use compatible configs it's still the same package ...

This is a result of the poor deprecation path (read: none)
dnscrypt-proxy v1 had, coupled with the poor handling of superseding it
with v2 (deleting all traces to v1, developing v2 in the same
namespace). That's just bad project management, and there's no reason to
rename our community/dnscrypt-proxy when (the same) upstream calls
itself dnscrypt-proxy v2 - it's, for all that matters, a major version
bump with breaking changes and an awful deprecation path.

> ... but when it shares the same
> code, repository and configs and it's named securedns-proxy it will be totally
> different.

IMO, if this was a new program officially called securedns-proxy, on a
different upstream URL, then yes - that'd be a new package.

>> Yes, that means the package in [community] is out-of-date, and no, your
>> involvement with upstream doesn't matter.
> I'm not the package owner.
>> Regards, Rob
>  The point is that the community package which doesn't build manually and
> point to nonexistent sources is the one which should be deleted instead of
> the one from AUR. If you prefer that upstream Archlinux instructions will look
> the same as those for Ubuntu/Debian[*] then it will be done but it would  mean
> that Archlinux project in current form is a joke and you role in it isn't worth a
> dime.

The package in [community] will be updated soon.

> [*] "Do not install the dnscrypt-proxy distribution package, as it is old, and unsupported."
> https://github.com/jedisct1/dnscrypt-proxy/wiki/Installation-Debian-Ubuntu
> ​Jordan

Regards, Rob

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20180404/15b38ee2/attachment.asc>

More information about the aur-general mailing list