Package Details: scitopdf-git r113.91b7463-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/scitopdf-git.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: scitopdf-git
Description: bash script to quickly fetch, download and open scientific papers from Sci-Hub's database
Upstream URL: https://github.com/dougy147/scitopdf
Licenses: GPL3
Provides: scitopdf
Submitter: 1995parham
Maintainer: 1995parham
Last Packager: 1995parham
Votes: 3
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2022-06-16 04:52 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2022-06-16 11:46 (UTC)

Dependencies (0)

Required by (0)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

m040601 commented on 2023-09-19 19:03 (UTC) (edited on 2023-09-19 19:11 (UTC) by m040601)

@Antiz

I change my mind and fully agree with you on this (TIL something new,thanks for the explanations on the license details)

My only interest was the best of AUR users. And to end this confusing situation. Because this scitopdf bash script really works and is extreeemly useful.I wasnt the one to push the button for the deletion request though.

Somehow I had gotten this "idea" that the "best thing" is the developer himself taking care of the PKGBUILD.

In hindsight I recognize this is not a good idea. The best is indeed to do what you propose. Keep this (1995parham) scitopdf-git, delete (dougy147) scitopdf.

In the future, if and when dougy147, does make proper releases/tags on github, than everyone maintaining this "scitopdf-git" here, can also help making a new good well maintained "scitopdf"

Antiz commented on 2023-09-19 12:57 (UTC) (edited on 2023-09-19 13:27 (UTC) by Antiz)

@m040601, @1995parham: In my opinion, the proper way to proceed regarding the other PKGBUILD would be to create a merge request from the scitopdf (dougy147) to this one (1995parham).

Indeed, the fact that the scitopdf PKGBUILD (dougy147) does not respect the VCS packaging guidelines prevents me from accepting the current deletion request for this package and proceed the way m040601 described below:
1 - Incorrectly named. I know the name "scitopdf-git" is taken by this package but, according to the logs, this package has been submitted on the AUR first, so it was up to dougy147 to discuss that with 1995parham instead of uploading a duplicate package (which is not allowed).
2 - No "pkgver()" function.

I don't see the point of reworking the scitopdf package (dougy147) to make it compliant with the packaging guidelines when this one (1995parham) already is. Despite being maintained by the developer of the software himself, the scitopdf PKGBUILD is just a duplicate package that does not respect the packaging guidelines in the end...

For the sake of the respect of the packaging guidelines as well as users, I'd suggest deleting the scitopdf package (dougy147) instead (or merging it into this package) and eventually add dougy147 as a co-maintainer for this package if you wish to collaborate on this.
As per the above, I'm rejecting the current deletion request for this package.

I also left a comment on the scitopdf page.

PS: This package should conflict with scitopdf in addition of providing it ;)

m040601 commented on 2023-09-19 10:50 (UTC) (edited on 2023-09-19 11:17 (UTC) by m040601)

Please consider deleting this PKGBUILD.

The developer himself, dougy147, himself also maintains a git PKGBUILD on AUR, https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/scitopdf. And it is, also, a git PGKBUILD. It would be great if you could collaborate there helping him there to polish it and maintain it. No need for reduplicating work.

Unfortunaley since the name "scitopdf-git" is taken by this one (1995parham), the other (dougy147) cant use that same name.

It's useless and confusing to end users to have duplictated PKGBUILDs on the AUR doing the same thing exactly.

It seems to be the wise thing do to since dougy147 is both the developer of the tool and maintains the PKGBUILD.

teun commented on 2022-06-16 13:48 (UTC)

It builds and works perfectly now. Very quick work, thanks!

1995parham commented on 2022-06-16 11:43 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting it. it was my fault and I will fix it.

teun commented on 2022-06-16 10:10 (UTC) (edited on 2022-06-16 10:11 (UTC) by teun)

Got the following error when trying to build with PKGBUILDer:

==> Validating source files with sha256sums...
    master.zip ... FAILED
==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check!
==> ERROR: makepkg (or someone else) failed and returned 1.

I'm not exactly an expert so it could be that it's something on my end, but I thought you might want to know.

By the way, I'm very excited about this package, so thank you for submitting it!