AUR submission guidelines state the following [a]:
“• Make sure the package you want to upload is useful. Will anyone else want to
use this package? Is it extremely specialized? If more than a few people would
find this package useful, it is appropriate for submission.”
Python2 is EOL since 2 years and is generally unsupported. The 'taskw' python
bindings has dropped compatibility since May 2022. There won't be any further
updates coming from upstream for the Python2 legacy version.
Also python2-taskw does not have any dependents on AUR, even though it should
be consumed by other Python applications/libraries.
Also this package is broken, because it does not declare its mandatory
dependency ('task' package built from taskwarrior source).
Last two user comments, from 2021 and 2022 respectively, just requested the
python2 subpackage from the formerly dual Py2/Py3 package to be removed or
split out. In essence, both users wanted to use only the python3 package, and
you have implemented this requested separation.
So now this Python2 package has no users apart from you maybe, and no packages
that rely on it.
Shall I go on?
Packages that are only used by one person should not be kept in the AUR, as per
guidelines.
[a]:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines
On 9 July 2023 15:15:12 GMT+02:00, Arvedui <[email protected]> wrote:
>That kind of reasoning makes sense for the official repositories where
>(binary)packages are distributed and there is a non trivial cost associated
>with
>that distribution.
>
>The AUR is mostly about sharing PKGBUILDs and the cost of having a
>PKGBUILD on the AUR is basically non existing and is mostly payed
>by me in terms of the time I spent maintaining it or defending its
>existence. So even if no one is using this, what harm does this do that
>warrants removing?
>
>On 2023-07-02 17:27:40, Marcell Meszaros wrote:
>> +1 for @gromit's observation.
>>
>> As this is a Python2 library, to be consumed by other Python2 packages, I
>> see no need to keep it on AUR. Because nothing depends on it.
>>
>> On 2 July 2023 17:20:15 GMT+02:00, Christian Heusel <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >On 23/06/30 08:40AM, Arvedui wrote:
>> >> I think this can still be usefull and should not be deleted.
>> >
>> >Whats the usecase? As far as I can tell there is a python3 variant of
>> >this module ...
>> >
>> >cheers,
>> >gromit
