On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 23:02:25 +0100, Uwe Koloska wrote:
> Am 17.01.2015 um 20:05 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> > Why n+1?
>
> Because it is technically another package than the one created
> locally. So you can easily distinguish between the last one that you
> complied yourself from the AUR and the firs
Am 17.01.2015 um 20:05 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> Why n+1?
Because it is technically another package than the one created locally.
So you can easily distinguish between the last one that you complied
yourself from the AUR and the first one from Community.
> I prefer no change of the current dot rele
On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 00:40:51 +0600, Rashif Ray Rahman wrote:
> On 17 January 2015 at 18:23, Jan Alexander Steffens
> wrote:
> > Resetting the pkgrel is indeed wrong. pkgrel should be bumped when
> > moving to [community], and that has been my habit when moving
> > packages from the AUR.
>
> I agr
On 17 January 2015 at 18:23, Jan Alexander Steffens
wrote:
> Resetting the pkgrel is indeed wrong. pkgrel should be bumped when
> moving to [community], and that has been my habit when moving packages
> from the AUR.
I agree. Even I used to be guilty. Although this is not AFAIK
documented anywher
On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
> Regarding to my AUR cache [1], it seems to be common practise, that
> packages that moved from AUR to community get a lower "pkgrel="-value.
> IMO that is very annoying and doesn't make sense. I don't want to
> reinstall software that does wo
