Hello, I hope that I'm in the right place to ask this. I am the maintainer of `sublime-text-3-imfix` https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/sublime-text-3-imfix/.
As the previous maintainer commented before abandoning the package: > Sublime Text 3200 supports fcitx officially, the binary is the same as the > original. So, now that the `imfix` suffix is unnecessary (but this package still being the main one), I wanted to rename this package to `sublime-text-3`, should I then delete this and create another one? --- Disclaimer: The package I maintain isn't the main one in popularity IF you compare with `sublime-text-dev` , but it lies about being an dev build, and is actually misleading people into downloading it, just to be the EXACT SAME as the stable version (we can tell about where it downloads the binaries from), so another question: Should I open a request to remove it for being dishonest? If you see the git history, it has always been like that. > commit 42d56cc9d0b082ab82684e5da23424fa296f66a7 > > Downgraded to build 3143, as 3153 can not be used without license. For context, dev builds require an 80$ license. And for some reason `sublime-text-nightly`, on the other hand, does exactly what `sublime-text-dev` description promisses to be doing, up-to-date binaries that require the paid license.
