Hi Marcell
Sorry for the delay but I had healthy issues.
Back to the topic of this package, I am observing a bit of a mixed / confused
standard.
Many times you said if a package is not broken, it can stay. Then when my
additional message stated that this is indeed broken, you said I didn't
Back to the topic of this package, I am observing a bit of a mixed / confused
standard.
Many times you said if a package is not broken, it can stay. Then when my
additional message stated that this is indeed broken, you said I didn't say
how it is broken. But I did say what are the reasons beh
@aksr is also extremely hostile, it is not much fruitful for me to communicate
with him. I would just receive more personal attacks and slurs from him, even
in places where I can't respond (see [a])
This is a severe thing I didn't wanted to read at this time (1.50 AM).
I've just suspended @ak
1) you request hasn't reported the package was broken
>2) also your reply doesn't report what's broken
>
>that's what I told you, until it's not broken there's no reason to delete it.
>not providing the mailx binary is not a reason to delete it
Muflone, my followup message did report what's broke
Request #48514 has been Rejected by muflone [1]:
until this is broken, there's no reason to delete it. not providing
mailx is not a valid reason to delete it
@Muflone, didn't you read my followup message?
No, what made you think I read the messages? I only press random buttons
until somet
On 27 February 2024 00:14:49 GMT+01:00, not...@aur.archlinux.org wrote:
>Request #48514 has been Rejected by muflone [1]:
>
>until this is broken, there's no reason to delete it. not providing
>mailx is not a valid reason to delete it
@Muflone, didn't you read my followup message?
Not only it is
Request #48514 has been Rejected by muflone [1]:
until this is broken, there's no reason to delete it. not providing
mailx is not a valid reason to delete it
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/muflone/
