Re: Work-needing packages report for Sep 6, 2002
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> If no developer in 2 or 3 years has looked at the wnpp and said "hey,
> I want to maintain this package" there's a good chance that they are
> not using these packages for a reason.
using != maintaining
> And of course, if we do remove the package and someone objects, then
> we can put it back in.
Mind you, for a DD it's much easier to step up than for a user, who maybe
doesn't even know there's a mailing lilst. He just doesn't have to sw.
> Ok, how about flagging packages for removal that
>
> 1. have been unmaintained for X days
> and
> 2. have X number of bugs of severity X pending
>
> is that reasonable? that is definitely something that can be automated
> and worked into the wnpp reports.
I agree, if we set the requirements for 2. high enough.
What about:
1. have been unmaintained for X days
2a. have X number of bugs of severity X pending
-> remove
2b. have Y number of bugs of severity Y pending
-> move into "unmaintained" or "contrib"
?
*t
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tomas Pospisek
SourcePole - Linux & Open Source Solutions
http://sourcepole.ch
Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland
Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11
-----------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: