Package Details: proton-pass 1.31.4-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/proton-pass.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: proton-pass
Description: Open-source and secure identity manager
Upstream URL: https://proton.me/pass
Licenses: GPL-3.0-or-later
Submitter: marmotz
Maintainer: mhdi
Last Packager: mhdi
Votes: 14
Popularity: 1.42
First Submitted: 2024-06-06 17:07 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-05-24 08:34 (UTC)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2

Musikolo commented on 2024-12-07 23:02 (UTC) (edited on 2024-12-07 23:04 (UTC) by Musikolo)

@Muflone, although I don't disagree with your observation, this looks to me the same description as the one used on the proton-pass-bin package. So, if the only available format is binary currently, shouldn't the 'opensource' word be removed from both packages alike?

@Everyone, also, per the AUR submission guidelines, one of the submission rules states the following:

"Packages that use prebuilt deliverables, when the sources are available, must use the -bin suffix. ...etc."

Since no sources are available, I don't think that rule applies yet. Once sources are released, then this rule will come into effect, but I believe we aren't there just yet. So, my understanding is that it's up to the packager to decide how to name their packages.

Finally, I'm not looking to open a discussion here, I just thought it was beneficial share these thoughts.

Regards.

Muflone commented on 2024-12-07 22:36 (UTC)

@Paragoumba this package description contains:

Open-source password manager for effortless protection.

How's this package open source but to be built from binary because the sources are not available? Please switch to a source based build or this package will be deleted, as proton-pass-bin is already available in binary form

Musikolo commented on 2024-12-05 04:13 (UTC) (edited on 2024-12-05 04:13 (UTC) by Musikolo)

I would say the code for Proton Pass Desktop isn't open sourced yet. At least, that's my understanding from the following 2 links:

That's aligned with what I see published at https://github.com/orgs/protonpass/repositories where you see the IOS and Android repos, but Desktop isn't anywhere there.

I'm not sure the code in the monorepo at https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClients contains the official open sourced code for Proton Pass Desktop app. I find all this a bit confusing, especially because I didn't see any announcement that confirms such a thing.

PlasticSoup commented on 2024-11-16 22:32 (UTC)

As previously commented this PKGBUILD installs a pre-built binary for Proton Pass. Since Proton Pass has source code available an AUR PKGBUILD with this name should use that code to build a binary. As it is, this is just a duplicate of 'proton-pass-bin'. On top of that there are multiple issues with the PKGBUILD (license missing, using 'groups'/'replaces' on the AUR, dependencies are wrong). https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines is a good place to start reading about how to properly create an AUR PKGBUILD.

DodoGTA commented on 2024-11-02 07:07 (UTC)

Can this package be compiled from source and use an Electron package from the official repos? Right now there are 2 packages doing the same thing (which can be confusing)

The code for Proton Pass seems to be found here: https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClients

Zoom311 commented on 2024-08-07 17:13 (UTC)

Needs update

kminehart commented on 2024-06-13 21:14 (UTC)

Thanks for packaging this!

If you try installing this with protonmail-desktop-debug installed you will run into conflicts.

proton-pass-debug: /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/c7/dd943c9a2f9568fcd82fa7baddb1f22f38fb22 exists in filesystem (owned by protonmail-desktop-debug)
proton-pass-debug: /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/c7/dd943c9a2f9568fcd82fa7baddb1f22f38fb22.debug exists in filesystem (owned by protonmail-desktop-debug)

To complete the install, I had to sudo pacman -R protonmail-desktop-debug

alexei commented on 2024-06-10 03:22 (UTC)

Thanks packaging this. Why does this depend on python-setuptools and git?

Also, this package installs a pre-compiled version, why is this package not named 'proton-pass-bin', according to the AUR convention?

The package that would be called proton-pass should build from source: https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClients/tree/main/applications/pass-desktop

« First ‹ Previous 1 2