[aur-requests] [PRQ#3723] Deletion Request for gg

Sascha Shaw sascha.shaw at mail.de
Sun Jul 12 12:24:37 UTC 2015

Am 11.07.2015 um 14:36 schrieb Doug Newgard:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 15:33:11 -0400
> Quint Guvernator <quint at guvernator.net> wrote:
>> Karol,
>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 3:23 PM,  <notify at aur.archlinux.org> wrote:
>>> karol_007 [1] filed a deletion request for gg [2]:
>>> The PKGBUILD is longer that the script it packages
>> Great. Why is this a problem?
>> I put it `gg` on the AUR to make sure I was familiar with the new aur4
>> process. I find `gg` useful, and I hope other Arch users will too.
>> $ wc -c PKGBUILD gg msg.txt
>> 255 gg
>> 607 msg.txt
>> Scott Adams said: "Engineers like to solve problems. If there are no
>> problems handily available, they will create their own problems."
>> Cheers,
>> Quint
> As a script, this makes little sense. All you're really doing is shortening a
> single command, which is much better done with an alias. You shouldn't even
> need the 'sudo' if this is local.
> I agree that it really shouldn't be in the AUR.
I agree, that it is a bad script, should not contain sudo and could be 
solved otherwise. What I don't agree with is this totally random way of 
deciding what's supposed to be okay and what not. I cannot find rules 
about what's okay. The same type of behavior lead to the removal of 
ddate from util-linux, because of the possible implications for some 
people with an arbitrary set of "traditional moral values"[1].

Instead of simply removing it from the AUR, we should file a bug report 
to solve the sudo problem (polkit integration perhaps?), this should 
also generate enough code to solve the "PKGBUILD longer than script" 
problem, a problem that might also happen with very dense Perl regex. 
Maybe adding the license text to the script might satisfy the wc -l 
in-depth analysis.


More information about the aur-requests mailing list