On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 1 June 2011 17:23, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 1 June 2011 17:03, D. Can Celasun <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Possible, but is it really necessary? How is this different than the > >> original approach (TU changes the name, maintainer updates the PKGBUILD) > ? > > > > The main advantage is that the new package gets uploaded before the > > name change, meaning there won't be a mismatch between pkgname in the > > PKGBUILD and the name displayed on the web interface. It's just a more > > consistent way to handle renames. > > One more use case covered by the comment/vote transfer is when there > are two very similar packages, both with votes and comments, and we > decide to remove one but keep the other. We could optionally move the > votes and comments from the package being removed to the remaining > package. > Votes, sure. But merging comments is a very bad idea. Comments would be left without any context and it would only confuse people. Anyway, implementing the original way is easier (and I have limited time), so I'll do that first and maybe I'll work on the rest later.
