Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] metadata revised - removal of packages
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 14:00:35
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] metadata revised - removal of packages by Alec Warner
1 On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 09:29 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
2 > > and then what ? if you're proposing removal of packages due solely to no
3 > > maintainer, then we're going to have to slap you around. dont remove
4 > > packages for that reason alone.
5 > > -mike
6 >
7 > So I guess the idea would then be, how do you find packages in the tree
8 > where dev FooGuy once maintained it but no longer does (because FooGuy
9 > left) and the package is old and nasty and no one cares about it. Leave
10 > it in the tree anyway? I certainly don't want unmaintained CRAP in the
11 > tree, although unmaintained decent programs are good. By decent I mean
12 > programs that are generally so old they never have version bumps ;)
14 The simple rule is leave it the hell alone. If it is completely broken,
15 there will be bugs filed. If nobody steps up to claim the package,
16 then, and only then, is it removed.
18 Did you look at the list of packages? I mean, how exactly broken can
19 "descent1-maps" get? *grin*
21 Package removal because it has no maintainer would probably remove a
22 large portion of the tree, possibly even packages that are necessary for
23 many people. There's quite a few packages that get maintained simply by
24 people fixing problems with them, but with no real "maintainer". While
25 this isn't the best solution, removing them from the tree just for this
26 reason is asinine.
28 --
29 Chris Gianelloni
30 Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
31 Games - Developer
32 Gentoo Linux


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature