Re: "removed" Debian packages section&BTS tags
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Drew Scott Daniels wrote:
> Aren't currently (caught) unmaintained packages maintained by Debian-qa? I
> haven't checked if any packages actually have them listed as the maintainer
> though.
Umm - in a way. AFAIK packages end up being assigned to QA if
they're unmaintained and if QA gets _really_ sick of them they get
dropped. That's why I'm proposing an unmaintained section. QA could
concentrate on the packages they care about (for whatever reason that
might be) and just push the rest into unmaintained. This would IMHO a)
further reduce the work of QA and b) take it out off "officialy supported"
Debian, so packages which are unmaintained + have bugs don't put a
burden on Debians reputation/quality.
> I would like "removed" to be an archive of almost dead packages and thus
> messing with the maintainer field would not be necessary.
Thers is such an archive. AFAIK it's snapshots.d.n. But it's evidentyl not
apt-get-able.
> Users of packages in the "removed" section should be somehow informed
> that removed packages are not maintained. Perhaps changing the
> maintainer field as you suggest is the best solution, but I think it
> would have to be done by Debian-qa or the maintainer of the "removed"
> archive.
IMO it should be done semi-automatically. If unmaintained & X RC bugs then
put into removed queue. Unless someone picks it out from there they'll
move out.
*t
--
to
ma
s
p
Reply to: