| 1 |
On 09/10/13 20:42, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 2 |
> El mié, 09-10-2013 a las 20:34 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió: |
| 3 |
> [...] |
| 4 |
>>> Will proceed to move its packages to maintainer-needed in a week if it |
| 5 |
>>> keeps being empty then |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Move the x11-wm/afterstep package to desktop-wm@ and x11-plugins/ ones |
| 8 |
>> to desktop-dock@ |
| 9 |
>> Ditto for net-mail/asmail which is a dock, so desktop-dock@ |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Only package from afterstep herd that should/could go to m-needed@ is |
| 13 |
>> the libafterimage package itself. |
| 14 |
>> But because only package using it in Portage is sci-physics/root, you |
| 15 |
>> might consider asking it's maintainer, bircoph |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Is desktop-wm really active on maintaining all the stuff they had under |
| 20 |
> their umbrella? I remember to need to go ahead with some pending icewm |
| 21 |
> problems some days ago :/ |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I meant that for long as desktop-wm@ herd is there, it should be used |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
But you have a very good point, the desktop-wm@ herd has been quiet for |
| 28 |
years and it's one of those herds that doesn't make sense because no |
| 29 |
maintainer can run all of the WMs the herd pretends to maintain |
| 30 |
So I would go for removing the herd altogether, WMs should have |
| 31 |
individual maintainers |
Archives