On Sat, 1 Jan 2022 05:33:08 +0100
Xyne via aur-general wrote:
> On 2021-12-28 19:52 -0800
> Brett Cornwall via aur-general wrote:
>
> >On 2021-12-29 03:27, eNV25 via aur-general wrote:
> >>So in this case the package would be fine if it had a different name,
> >>with a suffix like -upstream-bi
On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 21:40:38 -0800
Brett Cornwall via aur-general wrote:
>
> Would you be kind enough to post that to the thread I started over on
> aur-dev? (message ID <20211229050623.2jghonze56wi4fxe@faun>, subject
> "Packaging upstream binaries when we already have official releases")
>
>
On 2021-12-17 01:05, silentnoodle via aur-general wrote:
hey all,
Today a package i co maintain (telegram-desktop-bin) was deleted
because "Package exists in official community repo", but since we used
prebuilt binary as source I did not think that would have applied.
So guess I'd just like
On 2022-01-01 14:48, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jan 2022 05:33:08 +0100
* All packages built from pre-compiled sources in the AUR should
retain the
"-bin" suffix to indicate this, without exception.
Packages that cannot be built from source have always been an exception
>Sunday, January 2, 2022 5:24 AM +11:00 from Caleb Maclennan via aur-general
>:
>
>On 2022-01-01 14:48, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
>> On Sat, 1 Jan 2022 05:33:08 +0100
>>> * All packages built from pre-compiled sources in the AUR should
>>> retain the
>>> "-bin" suffix to indicate th
