Marcell, as per balena's own naming scheme [a], it is Balena Etcher,
this is also true of the name of their binaries [b], the packages on
other systems [c], and the name of their distributed releases on the github.
Agreed that it should be on the latest full release.
etcher-bin is not the same as this package. For someone who claims to
have nothing against appimages, you sure do seem to spend a lot of time
requesting the deletion of them.
[a] https://etcher.balena.io/
[b] https://github.com/balena-io/etcher/releases
[c]
https://github.com/balena-io/etcher#debian-and-ubuntu-based-package-repository-gnulinux-x86x64
On 17/06/2023 18:04, [email protected] wrote:
MarsSeed [1] filed a deletion request for balena-etcher-appimage [2]:
This is not needed.
Pkgname is wrong: the application's name itself is Etcher: no need to
include vendor's name in package name. [a]
There is no unrelated project package(s) named Etcher in Arch/AUR
repos.
This package is on a prelelease version (v1.18.8) currently, but it
should not be. A separate package should be created for unstable
releases.
AUR already has the latest pre-built stable release of this
application (v1.18.4 atm):
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/etcher-bin
Also the latter package integrates better with the system, without
duplicating libraries.
The latter package has been much longer on AUR, since 2018, and has
150 votes.
This one was uploaded in Jan 2023 and has only 6 votes.
If an AppImage based package is really desired, one should be created
with the name 'etcher-appimage' for latest stable version and/or an
adequately suffixed other package for unstable releases.
[a]: https://github.com/balena-io/etcher#readme
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/balena-etcher-appimage/
