Greetings,

Uploading duplicate packages under a new name is not allowed on the AUR,
and aggressive takeovers aren’t appreciated either. I’ve followed the
naming convention used by official Xorg packages in the extra repository,
and I see no reason to reinvent the wheel.

To clarify and compare our approaches:

1. XLibre packages cannot provide their Xorg counterparts. The ABI versions
have changed, meaning XLibre is not a drop-in replacement. Having it
otherwise will result in broken systems and GUI sessions. I initially did
this myself only because users would be reading the install instructions
anyway, which required them to rebuild necessary components manually.
However, now that there are discussions about adding XLibre to binary
repositories, such provides/replaces must be removed. I agree it's
inconvenient and I don’t enjoy the install process either, but for as long
as there are several ABI versions, this trade-off is unavoidable. The
author of the project has also made this clear:
https://github.com/chaotic-aur/packages/issues/3684#issuecomment-3013197463

2. Apart from problems related to ABIs, there is also an issue with
circular dependencies, namely with xlibre-input-libinput. The issue has
been addressed in my packages using a bootstrap package. Your approach
involves a “preupgrade” package to install before and then immediately
replace. Again, your approach will result in broken setups, as users will
not be forced to recompile anything after an update. Resolving this once at
install time is also better than having to deal with it on every upgrade.
In addition, users installing from binary repos won’t encounter this thanks
to the replaces entries I added.

3. I haven't found meaningful differences in our packages beyond a few
violations of AUR guidelines in yours (e.g., unneeded dependencies, ignored
user build flags). So I see no reason to replace mine.

Unrelated to the deletion request, I’d also like to address a few things:

1. The number of packages I maintain does not reflect my ability to support
them. Plenty of AUR and official maintainers handle significantly more
packages. I’ve also responded to each and every comment and email about
XLibre and my other packages. In fact, this lasted daily for years, until a
few weeks ago, when I had to update my packages once every few days instead
of daily for very good reasons. I've also seen vague claims about my other
packages being broken. If anyone feels that way, I invite them to point out
specific cases and see how quickly I resolve them (if there are any at all).

2. I will not tolerate hate directed at me or my work. This especially
shouldn't come from the XLibre community (either very active contributors
or co-maintainers, I haven’t researched it) and should not be tolerated by
you personally. I understand that reading step-by-step instructions is not
for all of us, but I expect feedback to be constructive and respectful.
Whoever sent the hateful messages and spammed my email by abusing the
Out-of-Date flag: I expect an apology under your real name, not from an
anonymous account. Otherwise, direct further communication to:
[email protected].

3. Once the above issues are resolved, and as long as the PKGBUILDs remain
compliant, I’d be happy to add you as co-maintainers. With my slight
experience in the topic and your official involvement, I think this project
can be extremely useful and well-supported.

Best regards,
Vitalii Kuzhdin

On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 8:18 PM <[email protected]> wrote:

> xlibre [1] filed a deletion request for xlibre-server [2]:
>
> Hello vitaliikuzhdin,
> Thank you for the xlibre pkgs.
> Currently we from the offcial Xlibre team are adding our supported
> PKGBUILD and related files to the AUR. So can you pls remove all you
> xlibre related packages?
> Thank you.
> artist for Xlibre
>
> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/xlibre/
> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/xlibre-server/

Reply via email to