On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Jonathan Arnold <jdarn...@buddydog.org> wrote: > There are 2 packages for the Copy.com client software package: > > copy - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/copy/ > copy-agent - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/copy-agent/ > > [...] > I'm not really sure how this should be resolved, mostly because I > wouldn't pick one over the other right now.
A year later, it's now clear that "copy-agent" is the package that should be kept, since... - it works - it is well maintained (updates appear shortly after upstream releases) - it even installs systemd units and browser plugins The "copy" package should be deleted, as... - it is broken - it has been flagged out-of-date for 10 months now with not reaction from the maintainer - it is badly named Can one of TUs please take care of this? Thanks!
