when I said "posted to git" I meant "github" obv. On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 2:19 PM Shane Simmons <[email protected]> wrote:
> If anyone cares to review the comments, yes, I posted on the git repo, but > only because of the admonishment that AUR isn't the place to post bugs on > aurman. Or, you could review the comments if they weren't deleted. Part > of mine were a plea to just leave the thread up for people who were > similarly confused. Request denied, account locked, and a blanket message > that peoples' accounts were being suspended for spam. > > Had you simply posted a simple "make sure to install expac-git before > upgrading or aurman will complain about broken dependencies" would have > avoided having anyone post comments. Had expac-git actually been broken > instead of me just not understanding that PKGVER doesn't get updated in a > PKGBUILD ;-) relying on a nonexistent package would be a bug, no? ;-) Your > response to that was to first post the output of pacman -Qi, then to hurl > an insult about how users are turing-complete and I should act like I am. > (I'm paraphrasing here because, quite frankly, I can't refer to the deleted > comments.) It's not nearly as obvious as you seem to think it is (I > generally avoid anything that has -git dependencies), and a simple google > search shows that you need guidance sometimes, too. Treat others the way > you want to be treated, imho. > > As for the reason I posted to git, well, > > "This is not the right place for reporting aurman bugs or request > features, please use https://github.com/polygamma/aurman/issues > > If you do not want to register on GitHub for such things, I do not care > from now on. > > I am not going to respond to comments on this page, if they have nothing > to do with the PKGBUILD. > > tl;dr: Bugs and feature requests -> GitHub, PKGBUILD problems -> here, not > going to answer comments if they have nothing to do with the PKGBUILD from > now on" > > Anyway, my solution was pretty simple: just stop using aurman. If I'm > going to lose access to AUR because my post is deemed Not A Problem, then I > can't trust the software. I didn't go around to various forums posting > about how people shouldn't use it; it's a popular AUR helper for a very > good reason. I fully expect my account will be suspended shortly after I > hit Send, and I guess that's fine. I'm not married to Arch, either, which > I'll have to stop using because I won't just make packages for myself to > keep using Upwork. But just...settle down. Not every non-positive > comment is a personal attack on you. > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:46 PM Eli Schwartz via aur-general < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> On 07/16/2018 01:47 PM, Shane Simmons via aur-requests wrote: >> > I never received any kind of notification that my account was >> > suspended, or why. As far as I can recall, my best guess would be >> > that it was because I had stupidly published a bug comment to the >> > aurman AUR page and was harshly schooled by the aurman developer that >> > his package depends on a -git package, which had to be installed >> > manually because, again, stupidly, I didn't know that -git packages' >> > PKGBUILDs don't contain the current version, but is instead >> > calculated during install. >> > >> > If that's why, after I understood the issue I just shrugged and went >> > on with my life, and wasn't aware there was a continuing problem >> > until I tried to push updates. I'm more than happy to push my >> > changes if I can; if it can't be reinstated, though, then I'd at >> > least like to know why, please. >> >> I did that, because of: >> >> " >> Alad commented on 2018-06-06 12:00 >> I've already removed scores of spam from this page. The next guy who >> makes personal attacks or feels entitled to support without using the >> proper channels as kindly requested by the author will get his account >> suspended indefinitely. >> " >> >> And it is rather disingenuous to suggest that you posted *one* comment >> and then moved on with life. One comment, is the number of comments that >> weren't deleted. You've got another five comments there that I or alad >> deleted, which makes four comments (3 deleted) for that *one* issue, and >> another 2 unrelated but also deleted comments. >> >> ... >> >> Now let's consider why you were making all those comments on the AUR >> page to begin with. It's because you already responded to a closed, >> explained issue on the developer's Github repository: >> https://github.com/polygamma/aurman/issues/153#issuecomment-399191472 >> >> And you did so in a rude manner, on top of ignoring the resolution (you >> did not exactly ask for understanding, you merely told the developer he >> was wrong). >> He then banned you from his github repo *after explaining yet again*, >> apparently because he dislikes you and doesn't want to listen to you >> etc. yadda yadda yadda.[1] >> >> So... you moved over to the AUR and decided to treat that as a means of >> furthering your campaign of argumentation, after a couple exchanges of >> which I deleted most of the comments and suspended your AUR account too. >> Because if people aren't supposed to flood the AUR comments with >> questions about the upstream development, then that goes triple for >> using the AUR for the explicit purpose of circumventing the upstream >> developer's ban policy for their own support medium. >> >> FWIW your account is no longer suspended. But, keep in mind that again >> there was a pinned comment warning users about the kind of behavior >> likely to result in suspension. >> >> I don't want to see this sort of hounding again. Picking a misguided >> fight with people across two websites does not contribute value to the >> AUR. >> >> (Next time consider politely asking on e.g. aur-general "they say this >> is supposed to work, but I don't understand how, can some knowledgeable >> person please explain the concept to me".) >> >> -- >> Eli Schwartz >> Bug Wrangler and Trusted User >> >> >> [1] -- People are welcome to think whatever they wish about developers >> who practice an over-eager ban policy, as long as they think it >> somewhere other than the AUR. I also encourage people to read the >> discussion at https://github.com/polygamma/aurman/issues/140 before >> passing judgment. >> >>
