On 2013-04-18 14:26, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Chris Down <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2013-04-17 22:04, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera > > I must say I do find it a bit off that a package with a conflicting name would > > be added without even attempting to contact the AUR maintainer. There was no > > rush to upload this package. You could have contacted him just to say what you > > were doing, but you didn't. > > Hi Chris, > > First, there was more than one packages in AUR (opensmtpd, > opensmtpd-portable, etc). I hope others maintainers will not claims > kinship. > I have contacted, AUR opensmtpd maintainer by mail in march to ask him > to update because the package was was out-of-date since weeks. He > doesn't answer and it's not the same email that Hugo. I'm wondering if > Hugo was maintainer of opensmtpd for more than 2 weeks. Indeed, as I mentioned earlier on, the package I maintained was originally called opensmtpd-portable, since that's the name the devs gave the non-openbsd version originally. I'd been maintaining it for well over a year. I had contacted the maintainer of opensmtpd many, MANY times asking him to disown it (since he kept abandoning it), but he would just updated it every time I requested that. The other opensmptd related packge was opensmtpd-portable-snapshot, which follows the upstream -snapshot branchs (instead of the -release branch). The former maintainer of opensmtpd had finally orphaned opensmtpd two weeks ago, at which point I merged my old package's votes and comments into "opensmtpd". In any case, opensmtpd-portable and opensmtpd-portable-snapshot both had 7 votes, and maintained by me. opensmtpd was out-of-date about 5 months ago, and had just 2 votes. Even if the name differed, it's clear which one was the real up-to-date package. In any case, I don't want to extend this discussion any further, you contacted the at-the-time maintainer and I guess that's what matters. There's little point arguing about this any further. > > I usually post a comment before removing package from AUR to notify > the old maintainer. Do I have forgot? > I think y're *very* light when you claims: you didn't contact the maintainer. > > Anyway, it's pure courtesy and not really the real reason of the complain. > > Secondly, I confirm, there was no rush. To give you more context, I've > my own opensmtpd package running on my computers since the first > releases of opensmtpd. Before pushing the package I telling myself : > "Oh I it works correctly on my stuff for weeks, it's on abs for 1 > week, I can push it to community". > So, I'm not a serial packager ! > > Emotional comments, like your and Hugo come time to time, usually on > aur-general, when packages are moved from AUR to community. AUR > PKGBUILD are _not_ the property of the maintainer (even if he's a good > guy who drink beer) and sending a mail can be automated by AUR to says > : "You're package have been removed. Thanks for you support :)" On the contraty, I'm glad to see it moved into community, but I would have greatly prefered to see a compatible package (ie: very similar flags, config paths, etc) to avoid having to "migrate" to it. > > Cheers, > > -- > Sébastien "Seblu" Luttringer > https://www.seblu.net > GPG: 0x2072D77A Cheers, -- Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Attachment:
pgpMrCa3fLOrL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
