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

[Doug Newgard]

On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:54:33 -0400
Jordan Glover via aur-general <aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:

> On April 4, 2018 5:32 PM, Doug Newgard <scimmia at archlinux.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:23:34 -0400
> > 
> > Jordan Glover via aur-general aur-general at archlinux.org wrote:
> >   
> > > I'm sorry for the harsh words. If those requests were made AFTER update package
> > > 
> > > in repo there won't be this conversation. I found situation where killing other people
> > > 
> > > efforts to make things work, unacceptable without providing an alternative. Common
> > > 
> > > sense should prevail the rules.
> > > 
> > > Jordan  
> > 
> > Common sense tells me that if we allow people to upload newer packages just
> > 
> > because the repo package is out of date, the AUR will be an even bigger mess
> > 
> > than it already is. Everyone will be uploading packages a few hours after
> > 
> > upstream releases updates, and of course they will just abandon them instead of
> > 
> > having them deleted. The rules are in place for a reason.
> > 
> > Doug  
> 
> Please be specific. We aren't talking about hours and bumping package version.
> Common sense can be used to know when taking action will make people worse-off.
> The package was managed so efficiently that even upstream benefited from it.
> Archlinux maintainer dosen't have to do anything else than copy-paste existing
> PKGBUILD. All work and testing is already done.
> 
> ​Jordan

I have been specific; the rules are in place for a reason, common sense says
that they're necessary. This case is not special.

C&Ping the entire PKGBUILD would be a huge mistake. Those sed commands
are...marginal, to be generous.