On 10 September 2010 13:09, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Det <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 9/9/10, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Deleted xorg-server-gentoo; will go through the songbird mess now. >>> >>> I've only deleted songbird-nightly-latest, the rest seem fine to keep >>> (i.e.: they have maintainers, were updated within a year and have >>> enough votes). >>> >> >> Ok, thank you but 'songbird' and 'songbird-svn' are the same package >> so the other one should be removed - with the addition that >> 'songbird-svn's PKGBUILD works better. >> >> 'songbird-nightly' and 'songbird-nightly-bin' are also the same >> package - with the addition that 'songbird-auto-nightly' is always up >> to date as it automatically checks for the latest nightly version. >> >> Sure, they do have a lot of votes but that's just because they've been >> around for so long, while 'songbird-auto-nightly' was created less >> than a month ago. >> >> Det > > Sorry, I'm having a hard time deciding what goes and what stays. > > If another TU wants to jump in and handle this request, please do. >
Wow, what a mess. For now I would certainly leave the songbird-svn. It has correct name and it seems to be quite good PKGBUILD. I'd prefer if the songbird-auto-nightly was renamed to the songbird-nightly-bin and then removed. I think songbird should be removed, because it's in fact the same as songbird-svn. I don't see any reason to keep it because it seems that they do not release any source tarballs. However it has just too much votes to remove it. Lukas
