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

Re: WNPP now on the BTS

On Sun, 6 Aug 2000, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:

> Hi Anthony et al,

Hi Marcelo,

>  Right now, the following packages are tagged as orphaned and are not
>  present on the distribution:
>  dpkg-scriptlib

dpkg-scriptlib is in both potato and woody (binary packages dpkg-perl and 

>  dunc (it's in stable)

John Hasler (the former maintainer) said:

  I suggested that it be removed as it is no longer functional, and I
  believe that it was.

  > Could you tell me the history of this package?

  The author orphaned it.  I took over maintainence for a while, but I
  consider it obsoleted by pppconfig.  I no longer have a copy on disk,
  though I'm sure it's on a CD somewhere.

That's why I've closed this bug report.

>  Now, about the packages marked as orphaned in the WNPP database but
>  without Debian QA set as its maintainer, I think that is a real
>  problem now.  Either the information is wrong, or the package is not
>  maintained at all.  Those are:
>    xmorph gqmpeg archie eggdrop hx sac simh simh-rsts-images
>    simh-unix-images sliplogin dip visual-tcl gnotes acs upsd cdwrite
>    chameleon wmsysmon sc xarchie yard mysql-manual dbf2pg
>    browser-history procmail-lib rel gambc scsh tama wmmail csh cgiwrap
>    guile1.3-doc

gqmpeg visual-tcl gnotes acs already have new maintainers; I have closed
these bugs.

>  > I'd suggest having packages maintained by -qa be a "normal" bug,
>  > unless they're standard or above in which case perhaps "important"
>  > could be justified.
>  Ok, sounds good.  What about those orphaned and not marked as being
>  maintained by Debian QA?  I'd say once Debian QA takes over the
>  package (that is, once that information is in the Packages file), the
>  severity can be downgraded.
>  This should have been: O -> important (the package /is/ orphaned),
>  ITO -> normal (the package /will be/ orphaned unless someone
>  expresses his intention to adopt it in a short time) and WTO ->
>  wishlist (it's somewhat possible that the package gets ITOed and/or
>  Oed at some point)

I can't see the point when a package has an "important" bug then: The
"right" way to orphan a package is to set the maintainer to Debian QA (and
to send a bug report against wnpp). If you argue like this, I can't see
any important bugs on wnpp.

>  Thanks,
>                                         Marcelo


A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a
"Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.
                -- Mahatma Ghandi

Reply to: