[aur-requests] [PRQ#7391] Deletion Request for fontconfig-enhanced-defaults

[notify at aur.archlinux.org]

Eschwartz [1] filed a deletion request for fontconfig-enhanced-
defaults [2]:

The package was originally submitted with the comment:
"This a renamed version of fontconfig-good-defaults. A Trusted User
removed it for a reason which is clearly invalid and will not respond
to my emails. Next time a Trusted User thinks about deleting this, I
challenge them to name one rule that it breaks and explicitly state
how it breaks it. I also expect Trusted Users to hold all other
packages in the Arch User Repository to the same standards."

It is presumably obvious why evading a package deletion by renaming is
not okay, but for additional context, the original deletion happened
in this PRQ: https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-
requests/2015-September/008546.html

Originally discovered because I was looking at the user's other
package "update-pacman-mirrorlist". Is this kind of behavior a trend?

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Eschwartz/
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/fontconfig-enhanced-defaults/