On 10/17/24 11:51 PM, Fabio Loli wrote:
Request #64317 has been Accepted by Antiz [1]:
[Autogenerated] Accepted deletion for neovim-nonicons-git.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Antiz/
Why this has been accepted? Not having a license is not an issue for AUR
In the archwiki there was wr
Request #64317 has been Accepted by Antiz [1]:
[Autogenerated] Accepted deletion for neovim-nonicons-git.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Antiz/
Why this has been accepted? Not having a license is not an issue for AUR
In the archwiki there was written to use `unkown` if license wasn't k
Request #64317 has been Accepted by Antiz [1]:
[Autogenerated] Accepted deletion for neovim-nonicons-git.
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Antiz/
dreieck [1] filed a deletion request for neovim-nonicons-git [2]:
Upstream has no license, so this package must not exist.
See https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2202042#p2202042
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/dreieck/
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/neovim-nonicons-git/
dreieck [1] filed a deletion request for neovim-nonicons-git [2]:
Upstream has no license, so this package must not exist.
See https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=2202042#p2202042
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/dreieck/
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/neovim-nonicons-git/