[aur-general] Handling coincidental name collisions

Vanush Misha Paturyan misha at cs.nuim.ie
Mon Feb 11 11:33:36 UTC 2019


On Feb 09 2019 20:36:16 -0500, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 2/9/19 2:35 PM, Xyne wrote:
> >> When the package furthermore has no other defined purpose - as Morten
> >> pointed out, this is clearly something overly specialized - *and* the
> >> deletion was handled according to procedure (with a deletion request,
> >> see below), then I don't see the issue.
> > 
> > The deletion request itself gives an invalid reason: it was not "supersed"(ed)
> > by the unrelated package in community. Also, just following the procedure
> > (report, delete) doesn't make any difference to the validity of the deletion.
> > Reports are just for regular users to bring the package to the attention of a
> > TU.
> 
> I agree -- there is no "procedure" for deleting packages at the moment,
> only a partially shared sense of politeness.
> 
> >> On the deletion request: it can be seen at [1]. It likely should have
> >> been accepted by a different TU than the requester, as well as given
> >> more time than 11 minutes before acception. Now if this were some
> >> systemic issue, rather than the occasional mistake any of us might make,
> >> then I could see why we'd have this discussion. In my experience, it is
> >> the occasional mistake.
> > 
> > I agree that it was likely just an inattentive mistake while working through
> > the requests. Nevertheless, it led to a user bringing it up on the forum so I
> > felt it necessary to address it here. It really isn't a big deal, but it would
> > be better to avoid repeating in the future if possible.
> 
> It was hardly an inattentive mistake while working through requests when
> the same TU who submitted the request after adding a totally different
> package to community under the same name, also clicked the delete button
> 11 minutes later.

I am mostly a "reader" in this list, but I though I'll contribute my
two cents: maybe the (currently missing) procedure for deleting
packages should stipulate that the same TU cannot submit deletion
request and then act on it. Can this be enforced in the software?
Assuming ordinary users cannot accept delete requests, the only change
then should be to check if TU that is trying to accept the delete
request is not the same TU that submitted the request in the first
place.

Cheers,

Misha

-- 
Vanush "Misha" Paturyan
Computer Science Department
Maynooth University
Maynooth


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20190211/20938c23/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the aur-general mailing list