Sure. I’ll do the same. I did not insult you in any way. Flaming is about "posting insults, often including profanity or other offensive language”. I considered you spammed by flagging out-of-date an up-to-date package, submitting too many comments on the archey3 AUR page, submitting a merge request into a different package rather than a deletion request which could have been relevant when the archey3 package in [extra] will be deleted.
You misappropriated my comment when I said to you that archey4 is more relevant for Arch users. I considered as well you misappropriated in my opinion the comment from the upstream archey3 dev, if I got it wrong on that, I’m sorry. > On 4 Aug 2023, at 12:30, Marcell Meszaros <[email protected]> wrote: > > I will let trusted users deal with this package and with your messages from > now on. > > But please don't flame anymore. Thank you. > > > On 4 August 2023 12:20:05 GMT+02:00, Gaspard d'Hautefeuille > <[email protected]> wrote: >> https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#spamadvertisingsolicitation >> >> Spamming is forbidden which you continue to do on this page: >> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/archey3-git. >> You also flagged out-of-date the archey3-git package while it was in sync >> with the upstream archey3 repo in order to promote archey4. >> You should only flag out-of-date when the upstream has submitted a new >> release. >> As it is a VCS package that is maintained and the upstream has not submitted >> any breaking changes for the package, I’m not sure it was the right way to >> do things. >> >> Your interpretation of "Ship it” slang is only yours. >> >> Going ahead is only meaning this in my opinion: >> >> 1) I am currently maintaining archey4-git >> <https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/archey4-git>, if votes and comments >> should be merged into of the VCS package archey3-git, it should go there. >> But I don’t think merging is a good idea. >> >> 2) The TU maintaining archey3 in [extra] would have to delete archey3 and >> promote archey4 in [extra] >> >> 3) Then, I would submit archey3-git for deletion because as long as there is >> an archey3 official package and official archey3 wiki page, a VCS-equivalent >> package should still be offered to the Arch Linux users >> >> 4) It does not make really sense to merge archey3-git into archey4 on the >> AUR: not the same upstream package, not the same upstream dev, VCS vs normal >> releases... >> >> >>> On 4 Aug 2023, at 11:40, Marcell Meszaros <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> # Do not flame # >>> >>> Flaming, in the most common sense definition, is directing negative, >>> disrespectful, and/or insulting comments toward someone. An equally or more >>> negative response, resulting in a cycling exchange of insults is often the >>> consequence. Flaming fellow members (including the Arch team) will not be >>> tolerated. Avoid personal insults and sarcastic or patronizing language. >>> Discussions can be productive, but quarreling is always destructive. >>> >>> https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#do-not-flame >>> >>> >>> On 2 August 2023 10:32:16 GMT+02:00, Gaspard d'Hautefeuille >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> A fork is a fork. It does not mean it has been superseded. >>>> https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Archey3 >>>> >>>> Archey3 is on the wiki, not Archey4. >>>> You have already mentioned Archey4 on the Archey3 AUR page, one year ago. >>>> And you spammed yesterday the Archey3 AUR page, by flagging it out-of-date >>>> while this archey3-git package is up-to-date with the upstream repo. >>>> https://github.com/lclarkmichalek/archey3 >>>> Not everyone wants to use Archey4, and forking by changing the number to >>>> make it seem like it has been superseded is not a good practice. >>>> >>>> Furthermore, you want to steal the 171 votes and comments of archey3 with >>>> this merge request. >>>> If the fork of archey4 was by the same author, we could have understood >>>> that, it is not the case here. >>>> >>>> Archey4 has 16 votes, does not have a wiki page (yet). >>>> >>>> It does seem too early to consider a deletion request for archey3-git in >>>> the AUR (Arch Linux User Repository). >>>> Maybe you could contact the author >>>> https://github.com/lclarkmichalek/archey3/issues and see what he is up to >>>> and if he really gives the seal of approval to archey4. >>>> AUR/archey3-git is not defunct and I am still maintaining it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> You know that archey - first of his name - decided to remove archey4 as a >>>> listed fork on GitHub. >>>> https://github.com/djmelik/archey >>>> >>>> And even, djmelik is planning a complete re-write of Archey. >>>> >>>> It is very much too early to say 100% that the fork archey4 has to take >>>> the crown. >>>> >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> >>>> HLFH >>>> >>>>> On 1 Aug 2023, at 17:26, [email protected] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> MarsSeed [1] filed a request to merge archey3-git [2] into archey4 >>>>> [3]: >>>>> >>>>> As discussed with maintainer @HLFH in comments 10+ months ago, this >>>>> application has been superseded by continuation fork archey4. He >>>>> posted a link to the new AUR package then, so users should be well- >>>>> informed at this point. >>>>> >>>>> Archey3 has not been developed since 2018. [a] >>>>> >>>>> Arch repo still carries the last archey3 (however, devs would be >>>>> advised to consider adopting archey4 to [extra]). >>>>> >>>>> Though archey3-git is a VCS package and AUR/archey4 is not, there's no >>>>> VCS package for the latter but it would still be good to migrate the >>>>> high number of votes and comments to the successor application's >>>>> package rather than just deleting them. >>>>> >>>>> AUR/archey3-git is defunct so there's no harm in removing that in >>>>> favor of archey4. >>>>> >>>>> [a]: https://github.com/lclarkmichalek/archey3/commits/master >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/MarsSeed/ >>>>> [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/archey3-git/ >>>>> [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/archey4/ >>>> >>
