Re: Orphaned packages that were not part of etch
Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 04:45:42PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
>> I've compiled a list of orphaned packages that were not part of etch
>> (and, unless otherwise noted, were not part of sarge).
>> I think it would be a good idea to remove some of them (at least from
>> testing) before lenny's release. Including a package in a stable release
>> gives it much more weight and it usually survives longer in the archive
>> even if it only bitrots. So removing unneccessary packages now would be
>> a good idea IMHO.
> I've now filed bugs against those packages:
Let me see if I got it right:
You filed a bug against karchiver because it:
* is not in etch (because it was not uploaded in time for etch),
* is orphaned (...); and because
* it has a "low" popcon (283/86 inst/vote; for a package that has never been
And because of those reasons we are preventing a package from being shipped
in lenny? Is that right?
IMHO there are many other packages that are better candidates for not being
shipped in lenny than the above mentioned example.
Atomo64 - Raphael
Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments.