Update themeengine.rb to a maintained fork

[SoCuul]

Important: Do not tick a checkbox if you haven’t performed its action. Honesty is indispensable for a smooth review process.

In the following questions <cask> is the token of the cask you're submitting.

After making any changes to a cask, existing or new, verify:

• The submission is for a stable version or documented exception.
• brew audit --cask --online <cask> is error-free.
• brew style --fix <cask> reports no offenses.

Additionally, if adding a new cask:

- [ ] Named the cask according to the token reference.
- [ ] Checked the cask was not already refused.
- [ ] Checked the cask is submitted to the correct repo.
- [ ] brew audit --cask --new <cask> worked successfully.
- [ ] HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --cask <cask> worked successfully.
- [ ] brew uninstall --cask <cask> worked successfully.

---

[razvanazamfirei]

Thanks for opening this, which of the following criteria does this cask meet?

Forks must have the vendor’s name as a prefix on the cask’s filename and token. If the original software is discontinued, forks still need to follow this rule so as to not be surprising to the user. There are two exceptions which allow the fork to replace the main cask:

The original discontinued software recommends that fork.
The fork is so overwhelmingly popular that it surpasses the original and is now the de facto project when people think of the name.
For unrelated apps that share a name, the most popular one (usually the one already present) stays unprefixed. Since this can be subjective, if you disagree with a decision, open an issue and make your case to the maintainers.

[SoCuul]

I think it would fall under the The fork is so overwhelmingly popular that it surpasses the original and is now the de facto project when people think of the name case, but I'm not sure.

The original repo has more stars and forks than the fork, but it has not been maintained for over 4 years. Looking into issues people tell you to navigate to the new fork. This new fork has less stars/forks but is a version of this software that is actively maintained and used by individuals.

[SMillerDev]

Let's add it with a vendor name, and we can direct people to consider that from the old cask

[SoCuul]

Let's add it with a vendor name, and we can direct people to consider that from the old cask

I was under the assumption that discontinued casks were not allowed to exist on the repo. Did I misread the docs?

[SMillerDev]

I was under the assumption that discontinued casks were not allowed to exist on the repo. Did I misread the docs?

If it's actively discontinued, yes. If it's not maintained actively... we can deprecate it.

We also don't want to install a version of software people were not expecting, so we should only replace a cask source if it is abundantly clear that nobody could possibly want the original source.

[SoCuul]

If it's actively discontinued, yes. If it's not maintained actively... we can deprecate it.

The last release was 6 years ago, and the last commit was over 4 years ago.

[SMillerDev]

The last release was 6 years ago, and the last commit was over 4 years ago.

And yet, it is not explicitly discontinued so deprecating as :unmaintained is the clearest signal to users of the status of it.

[SoCuul]

The last release was 6 years ago, and the last commit was over 4 years ago.

And yet, it is not explicitly discontinued so deprecating as :unmaintained is the clearest signal to users of the status of it.

Sorry for the late reply! I see what you're saying, sounds good.