Package Details: telegram-purple-git 1.4.3.a103df3-1

Git Clone URL: (read-only)
Package Base: telegram-purple-git
Description: Adds support for Telegram to Pidgin, Adium, Finch and other Libpurple based messengers.
Upstream URL:
Keywords: finch pidgin protocol purple telegram
Licenses: GPL
Conflicts: telegram-purple
Provides: telegram-purple
Submitter: franciscod
Maintainer: farwayer
Last Packager: farwayer
Votes: 46
Popularity: 0.004729
First Submitted: 2014-10-27 18:59
Last Updated: 2019-10-11 15:35

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next › Last »

vinipsmaker commented on 2015-02-08 21:33


Okay, I disowned the package. Feel free to do whatever you want. I think I'll myself use the -git package, now that I understand the master branch policy from telegram-purple repo.

franciscod commented on 2015-02-08 21:28

I think a merge is appropiate. It seems the correct naming is -git, so we should merge telegram-purple into telegram-purple-git, right?

Obrigado :)

vinipsmaker commented on 2015-02-08 21:12


What I found of relevant:

"Package versions should be the same as the version released by the author. Versions can include letters if need be (eg, nmap's version is 2.54BETA32). Version tags may not include hyphens! Letters, numbers, and periods only."

"Suffix pkgname with -cvs, -svn, -hg, -darcs, -bzr, -git etc. unless the package fetches a specific release."

Reading a little more on the page <>, I think I should drop this package and your package should be the only one maintained. What do you think?

vinipsmaker commented on 2015-02-04 04:34


I wasn't aware about the telegram-purple development process.

It's a clever trick to use this information to ease the PKGBUILD maintaince. I'll read about ArchLinux packaging practices again. Maybe I'll find something useful.

franciscod commented on 2015-02-04 03:40

Thanks for your explanation! I'm ashamed of my initial hostile reaction, I felt like my work being copied and didn't like it (dammit, ego!). Sorry!

At upstream, the development happens on feature branches. The master branch points to the latest stable tagged version (also, your package points to v0.6, and the latest one is v0.6.1) so we'd supporting the exact same version!

Maybe the best way of joining forces is merging both packages and sharing the maintain process on github. What do you think?

vinipsmaker commented on 2015-02-04 03:32

I can disown this package if you want to maintain it.

Some users want the git/development version of some package (I use inkscape-bzr, for instance), but others want the latest stable released version (normal packages). I didn't find the telegram-purple package, then I "forked" the git package.

Simple as that.

franciscod commented on 2015-02-04 03:30

I'd like to understand why did you clone it, care to explain? Thanks!

franciscod commented on 2015-02-04 03:29

Phew, dude... I was being ironical. I've filed a merge request, I don't think the user fragmentation between the two packages (even if this one wasn't a clone of mine) is useful at all.

franciscod commented on 2015-02-04 03:28

Filed a merge request for this package:, it even has my name on its PKGBUILD!

vinipsmaker commented on 2015-02-04 03:22