| 1 |
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:21 AM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Vaeth |
| 3 |
> <vaeth@××××××××××××××××××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Please, please, stop removing packages for no reason! |
| 5 |
>> This happens now way too often: |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> If folks do not want to maintain it anymore, then it will be removed. |
| 9 |
> Feel free to contribute to Gentoo and maintain the packages. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I think this makes sense, IFF there is something fundamentally wrong |
| 13 |
with the package. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Being unmaintained in and of itself is not something fundamentally |
| 16 |
wrong with the package. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Having a few open bugs is not either. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Having security problems or being unusable is. I'd throw in things |
| 21 |
like serious file collisions and similar serious quality problems as |
| 22 |
well. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I'd even throw in a missing distfile, but only if no user of the |
| 25 |
software is willing to proxy maintain that aspect of the package. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The one thing missing from this discussion is that users CAN |
| 28 |
proxy-maintain things. Oh, and ANYBODY can run an overlay (it just |
| 29 |
won't necessarily be listed in layman - but that is how every distro |
| 30 |
does it). |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I do think it is a loss for Gentoo if we start removing packages |
| 33 |
simply because they don't change (which is all a dead upstream means - |
| 34 |
it isn't always a bad thing). |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Rich |
Archives