On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:54:33 -0400 Jordan Glover via aur-general <email@example.com> wrote:
> On April 4, 2018 5:32 PM, Doug Newgard <scim...@archlinux.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:23:34 -0400 > > > > Jordan Glover via aur-general firstname.lastname@example.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 because the repo package is out of date, the AUR will be an even bigger mess 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.