[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Slowly giving up on most packages

Hi there!

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 05:35:30 +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> Here a more detailed view of the situation...

Some news...

> - all the BESE tools will be removed in one week if no one from this
>   list or upstream one (to which I will write shortly after this mail)
>   will show up in one week.  Upstream development has stalled (the
>   software is quite robust), but I am not really sure there is a Debian
>   userbase, since PopCon data show no recent installations.

Adoption requested, I will ask for their removal in two weeks:


> - ITP #359348 about cl-rfc2109 will be tagged as wontfix and closed


> - ParenScript is still actively developed by upstream, but since this
>   one as well was a dependency for UCW, I will simply ask for removal.
>   Moreover, because of darcs problem, the Debian version is lagging
>   behind upstream:
>     http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-common-lisp-devel/2008-October/001042.html

Adoption requested, I will ask for its removal in two weeks:


> - trivial-sockets is no more developed upstream and it has been
>   superseded by cl-usocket (read below), I will ask for its removal.

Asked for removal:


> - cl-geodesics: I will ask for its removal (no recent PopCon
>   installations).  This could have happened before, my fault:
>     http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494404#15

Asked for removal:


> - tbnl: I will simply ask for removal, as it was superseded by
>   Hunchentoot.  The transitional period was longer than I planned:
>     http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-common-lisp-devel/2008-October/001024.html

Asked for removal:


Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-common-lisp-devel/attachments/20090809/7eeef91f/attachment.pgp>

Reply to: