Re: Missing xemacs
Kevin Dalley <email@example.com> writes:
> The discussion was whether xemacs-19.14 or 19.15 was the best choice
> for bo. Could you please state your reasons for removing xemacs?
Moving 19.15 to bo was out of the question because of the time and the
seriousness of bugs still being filed against it. I never considered
this a viable option.
> xemacs-19.14 is usable and better than nothing.
> Perhaps I misunderstood our policy, but I thought that
> a package should only be removed from stable if it has a critical
No, packages are removed from stable for the far more common reason
that they're simply not ready for release. Releasing software that we
know is full of bugs while at the same time advising people to install
the package out of unstable is silly.
We're not trying to compete with other distributions on sheer number
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .