Re: Helping busy maintainers

[Romain Francoise <rfrancoise@debian.org>]

Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> writes:

> Werner Heuser <wehe@debian.org>

>   Werner mentioned to me that he is moving.  He has 2 RC bugs which
>   have to be fixed.
>   http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?maint=wehe@debian.org

I had a look at #190685, it is pretty obvious to fix (obsolete GCC
switch).  I have prepared a NMU but I can't test it because the package
is a library for some obscure hardware I never heard of, so I won't
upload it.  I'll send a patch to the bug.

I'm wondering whether it would not be easier to drop this package
entirely, given that:

- it has two FTBFS bugs opened (one severity important, the other
  serious) which were never responded to even though one of them is
  dated July 10, 2002.

- the package has had only one upload overall and is in pretty bad
  shape, I get the following lintian warnings and errors:

  W: libkemo-m104 source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.5.2
  E: libkemo-m1041: sharedobject-in-library-directory-not-actually-a-shlib
     usr/lib/libkemo-m104.so.1
  W: libkemo-m1041: copyright-lists-upstream-authors-with-dh_make-boilerplate
  W: libkemo-m104-dev: copyright-lists-upstream-authors-with-dh_make-boilerplate

  ... and the versioning scheme looks fishy (version 1-1?).

- the library doesn't seem to be used by any program in the
  distribution:

  $ apt-cache rdepends libkemo-m1041 
  libkemo-m1041
  Reverse Depends:
    libkemo-m104-dev
  $ apt-cache rdepends libkemo-m104-dev
  libkemo-m104-dev
  Reverse Depends:
  $

Martin, what do you think?

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :' :        Romain Francoise <rfrancoise@debian.org>
 `. `'         http://people.debian.org/~rfrancoise/
   `-