| 1 |
On 03/01/2017 15:24, Damien LEVAC wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On 01/03/2017 09:14 AM, Michael Mol wrote: |
| 5 |
>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 12:05:10 PM EST Michał Górny wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:00:52 +0700 (+07) |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> grozin@g.o wrote: |
| 9 |
>>>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2017, Brian Evans wrote: |
| 10 |
>>>>> IMO, this one should be given last-rites as upstream is dead and it |
| 11 |
>>>>> heavily depends on wireless-tools and WEXT. |
| 12 |
>>>> I use it on 2 notebooks. It works fine, and is (from my point of |
| 13 |
>>>> view) the |
| 14 |
>>>> most convenient tool to control ethernet and wifi connections on a |
| 15 |
>>>> notebook. Why lastrite it when it works? |
| 16 |
>>> This is the Gentoo Way™. Having a working software is not a goal. |
| 17 |
>>> Gentoo focuses on the best bleeding edge experience and therefore |
| 18 |
>>> highly relies on software packages that are under active development |
| 19 |
>>> and require active maintenance. The packages in early stages of |
| 20 |
>>> development are especially interesting since they can supply users |
| 21 |
>>> and developers with variety of interesting bugs and unpredictable |
| 22 |
>>> issues. |
| 23 |
>> Do we have detailed treatise documenting the points and counterpoints |
| 24 |
>> to "Why |
| 25 |
>> lastrite it when it works?" It's a question that comes up every month |
| 26 |
>> or two, |
| 27 |
>> and the reasons, for and against, are probably mature enough to get |
| 28 |
>> numbers, |
| 29 |
>> now. |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
>> Reason #3 in favor: "It works for me" may only be valid from a particular |
| 32 |
>> perspective. Without active maintenance, there may be subtle bugs that |
| 33 |
>> aren't |
| 34 |
>> immediately obvious. Bugs that aren't immediately obvious aren't always |
| 35 |
>> innocuous; sometimes they're insidious background data loss. Other |
| 36 |
>> times, they |
| 37 |
>> might be security vulnerabilities no good guy has yet noticed. |
| 38 |
> ...and sometimes a package just stop being "actively" maintained because |
| 39 |
> it is feature-complete (as far as the goals of the project were |
| 40 |
> concerned) and just works. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Certainly not the case here. wicd generates lots of complaints from |
| 43 |
users and upstream does not exist. Sometimes distro maintainers float a |
| 44 |
patch, but it is definitely in a problematic situation. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
> The minimum conditions to lastrite something should be not actively |
| 48 |
> maintained _and_ with open bugs that either compromise security or |
| 49 |
> affect normal usage subject to the condition that it is not still used |
| 50 |
> by users. I do not think at this point in time Gentoo devs have any mean |
| 51 |
> to know the popularity of different packages, but that would be a must |
| 52 |
> to take proper decision as far as retiring packages goes. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> -- Just a random Gentoo user. |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
Thomas Kahle |
| 59 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~tomka/ |
Archives