| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> but what's the problem with keeping it and not breaking older |
| 3 |
> upgrade paths? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
This whole discussion seems a bit academic. Somebody pointed out that |
| 7 |
we have a version of bash we might not need any longer. If by some |
| 8 |
miracle the bash maintainers weren't already aware of it, they are |
| 9 |
now. If they want to keep it around for some reason, who cares? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
There is enough bikeshedding when it comes to treecleaning the |
| 12 |
packages that aren't being maintained. I don't think we need to |
| 13 |
debate the merits of the packages that are. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Rich |
Archives