| 1 |
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 09:22:00AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> W dniu pią, 22.06.2018 o godzinie 21∶50 -0500, użytkownik Marty E. |
| 3 |
> Plummer napisał: |
| 4 |
> > So, as you may be aware I've been doing some work on moving bzip2 to an |
| 5 |
> > autotools based build. Recently I've ran into app-crypt/mhash, which is |
| 6 |
> > in a semi-abandoned state (talking with the maintainer on twitter atm), |
| 7 |
> > and I was thinking it may be a good idea to set up a project for keeping |
| 8 |
> > these semi-abandoned and really-abandoned libraries and projects up to |
| 9 |
> > date and such. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > Basically, an upstream for packages who's upstream is either |
| 12 |
> > uncontactable or is otherwise not accepting bug fixes and patches. So |
| 13 |
> > far I can only think of app-crypt/mhash and app-arch/bzip2 but I'm sure |
| 14 |
> > there are others in this state. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> So in order to fix problem of semi-abandoned packages, you're creating |
| 18 |
> an indirect herd-like entity that will soon be semi-abandoned itself |
| 19 |
> because people will be dumping random packages into it and afterwards |
| 20 |
> nobody will claim responsibility for them. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> -- |
| 23 |
> Best regards, |
| 24 |
> Michał Górny |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
No, I mean for packages which are important enough in gentoo to warrant |
| 27 |
such treatment. For instance, every email I've tried for bzip2's |
| 28 |
upstream bounced or recieved no reply. That, I assume, is important |
| 29 |
enough to actually maintain and improve. Any other library which may be |
| 30 |
as important which are as inactive would be added. |
Archives