[aur-general] Deletion request: quark

2014-05-25 Thread Aaron DeVore
I am the maintainer of the quark package. I can't get it to compile, there hasn't been an additional vote in years, and no upstream activity in almost 4 years. Please delete. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/quark/

Re: [aur-general] ttf-droid-sans duplicate of community/ttf-droid?

2014-05-25 Thread SanskritFritz
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Jerome Leclanche adys...@gmail.com wrote: I don't really understand the difference between community/ttf-droid and any of these: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0K=ttf-droid Any idea about duplicates in there? ttf-droid-sans Comment by graysky

[aur-general] Request to be maintainer of AUR package 'gimp-light'

2014-05-25 Thread Steven Honeyman
The package gimp-light in the AUR has been left abandoned for over a year. I have written an updated PKGBUILD for 2.8.10, so wondered if the package could be orphaned so that I can take over as the maintainer? (The current maintainer seems to have disappeared)

[aur-general] Package orphaning policy improvement - RFC

2014-05-25 Thread Nowaker
Hey, Currently one has to contact the maintainer and wait 2 weeks before reaching a TU on the ML to take over the package. I think this is totally OK when the maintainer really maintains the package, e.g. has generally frequent updates, responds to the comments, etc. However, this is an

Re: [aur-general] Package orphaning policy improvement - RFC

2014-05-25 Thread Steven Honeyman
As a newcomer to packaging for the AUR, that was one of the things I thought I wonder why they don't do that already I'd read about some September cleanups (2011/2012 only?). Also, how about if orphaned for more than 3 months, then delete? There are some really outdated packages on there! On

Re: [aur-general] Package orphaning policy improvement - RFC

2014-05-25 Thread Yamakaky
Also, how about if orphaned for more than 3 months, then delete? I think auto-orphan is ok, but auto-delete is a bit wrong. There is a lot of really outdated packages, but maybe some ones are using them. And it can be used as a template for an updated version.

Re: [aur-general] Package orphaning policy improvement - RFC

2014-05-25 Thread Berno Strik
On Sun, 25 May 2014 17:06:21 +0200 Nowaker enwuk...@gmail.com wrote: Hey, Currently one has to contact the maintainer and wait 2 weeks before reaching a TU on the ML to take over the package. I think this is totally OK when the maintainer really maintains the package, e.g. has generally

Re: [aur-general] Account deletion request

2014-05-25 Thread Ypnose
Hi Xyne, First, thank you for your answer. Xyne x...@archlinux.ca wrote: There is no normal way to delete user accounts at the moment. The motivation for this was the preservation of comments in discussions. I think there was some discussion recently about enabling account deletion by

Re: [aur-general] Deletion request: quark

2014-05-25 Thread Lukas Jirkovsky
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Aaron DeVore aaron.dev...@gmail.com wrote: I am the maintainer of the quark package. I can't get it to compile, there hasn't been an additional vote in years, and no upstream activity in almost 4 years. Please delete. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/quark/

Re: [aur-general] Package orphaning policy improvement - RFC

2014-05-25 Thread Jeremy Audet
+1 — Jeremy Ichimonji10 Audet

Re: [aur-general] Package orphaning policy improvement - RFC

2014-05-25 Thread Thiago Barroso Perrotta
On Sun, 25 May 2014 17:06:21 +0200 Nowaker enwuk...@gmail.com wrote: What do you think about auto-orhpaning packages that stay marked out-of-date for more than, say, 3 months? Done automatically by AUR, with no request on ML. +1 for that. Of course, it would be nice to also auto-mail the