1 |
On 02/01/2013 12:20 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: |
2 |
> On 01/02/2013 12:11, Rich Freeman wrote: |
3 |
>> I do think it is a loss for Gentoo if we start removing packages |
4 |
>> simply because they don't change (which is all a dead upstream means - |
5 |
>> it isn't always a bad thing). |
6 |
> |
7 |
> The problem is that a package that doesn't change _will_ bitrot. Full stop. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Trying to pretend that the problem does not exist, that an unmaintained |
10 |
> package is just as fine as a maintained one is stupid and shortsighted, |
11 |
> and explains why I have 1600 bugs open... |
12 |
|
13 |
Making up new situations up like cross-dev, Gentoo/Prefix, or jet |
14 |
another cluttered C compiler should not doom working software. |
15 |
|
16 |
I agree on your testing effort and practice, but compliance with the |
17 |
weirdest of all setups shouldn't be ultimate reason. |
18 |
|
19 |
-- |
20 |
Michael Weber |
21 |
Gentoo Developer |
22 |
web: https://xmw.de/ |
23 |
mailto: Michael Weber <xmw@g.o> |