Re: Work-needing packages report for May 25, 2001
Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2001, Sam Couter wrote:
>> Should bugs be filed against ftp@debian.org to remove packages that have
>> been orphaned longer than some number of days? I believe this has been done
>> in the past as a once-off type of thing, but should it become an automatic
>> thing with each mailout of the wnpp report?
>
>No! Why should we remove packages only because noone is adopting them?
>This doesn't mean that this package has no users. I adopted many packages
>to avoid that they get removed (and I sent RFAs immediately after adopting
>them) and I got mails of several users that were happy that a package they
>are using wasn't removed (and many of these packages already have new
>maintainers).
>
>OTOH:
>When you can tell about big problems (e.g. "cannot build from source" or
>security problems) that cannot be easily resolved that's a good reason to
>consider the removal of an orphaned package.
"Is useless" or "better alternatives available" are also good reasons,
especially if the package isn't maintained. With over 7000 packages, RC
bugs aren't the only reason we should consider trimming some, although
they're a good place to start looking.
--
Colin Watson [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: