| 1 |
On Thursday, April 25, 2019, 8:39:56 PM GMT+2, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I'm sorry but we are simply overwhelmed with work. For this reason, |
| 4 |
> we're trying to focus on handling updates for existing packages first. |
| 5 |
> Sadly, this often takes all our time and there's none left for new |
| 6 |
> packages. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
OK, so I'll take your word for it. Here's a fix for a package that has been marked to be removed within 30 days: |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/11833 |
| 11 |
Just kidding... I know you're overwhelmed. We're all here to pitch in. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
This package is mail-filter/mimedefang. If it doesn't get unmarked for removal then it's really too bad. There might not be enough dev time for PR revision, but if there's one then at least the deadline should be removed, don't you think? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The other packages I was referring to were c-icap (https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=900eb89a8818963cf351d27df3e1d198409bf5b9) and squidclamav. Actually, they weren't "new" packages. They were removed because there weren't any PRs on github at the time and because Gentoo had rather old versions compared to upstream, right? However, there were patches/contributions in bugs.gentoo.org that were later moved to github, and the packages per-se weren't a security risk or had serious compilation issues. Am I wrong? |
| 16 |
What I'm trying to say is that the definition of "new" here is fuzzy. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Anyway, I'd just like to say once again that if the contributors can do anything to help, please give out clear instructions (for rookies). We'll be more than happy to help. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Thanks, |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Vieri |
Archives