"removed" Debian packages section&BTS tags
I propose that an removed packages archive of Debian (& non-free) packages
be created. This archive is to be kept separate from Debian just as
non-free is.
This archive is to be called "removed".
Having BTS entries for removed packages is useful, however perhaps
a flag is needed for them to reduce the work of Debian-qa and other bug
squashers. Currently bugs are closed [1] on removed packages. For this
reason I would like there to be a tag for "removed" packages, to be called
"removed" and I would like their bugs to remain open on the BTS.
The benefits of such an archive are:
*Packages not in the archive but that are desirable to users can be
easily added using apt.
*Packages that are removed for legal reasons are easier to spot (not in
removed and not in the archive).
*Debian developers who see a "removed" package that they want have less
work to do to add a package to the Debian archives.
*Debian developers who were thinking of creating a package for a program
may be able to see why a package has been removed (even seeing the actual
contents and experience the problems if they desire/need to).
*Packages get an easy second chance to be added back into the Debian
archives.
*Users would more easily be able to see what packages were removed.
*Users would have a better method of deciding to use removed packages for
specialized reasons (I like some of the buggy programs that have been
removed).
The perceived negative aspects of such an archive are:
*Debian's quality would be far less if unmaintained packages were kept
(but this isn't "Debian" just as non-free isn't Debian and it will be
clear that these packages are not nearly as desirable).
*More work would be created for the qa group (but the archive is separate
and people who get from the "removed" archive should not expect the
support of the qa group).
*More bandwidth will be required (not a significant amount if they are
removed for what users believe is legitimate reasons. If significant
bandwidth is used for "removed" packages then perhaps the package
shouldn't have been removed?)
Further discussion is needed on how main, contrib and non-free should be
structured/noted in the archive. Also further discussion is needed as to
how to create a non-us "removed" archive.
Below are some notes that I have been keeping on this subject:
*As stated there is a list in the archives (
http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.txt ) is a list of packages removed
from the archives.
*unmaintained package != bad package
*removed packages and packages with RC bugs should not be in Debian's
stable release.
* http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.txt 's list of reason types is
good, however simple sometimes the reason for a request is imho not very
good. For this reason, unless their are legal problems, the original
package source and diff *should* be kept somewhere.
*auric is only available to Debian Developers and it has an archive of
Debian packages.
*snapshot.debian.org has old packages for a while, but does not easily
accommodate the usage of apt-get.
*Further discussion on this topic can be found in Debian-Devel under the
titles "Unmaintained Debian packages section&BTS tags", "Work-needing
packages report for Sep 6, 2002" and "Debian (would like) to do list" as
well as on Debian-user under the title "Debian (would like) to do list"
****I will (eventually) consult with debian-qa as to why unmaintained
packages are removed from unstable. I do not believe this to be a
productive process, but perhaps a new location is needed for such
packages.
[1] if I didn't misinterpret Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> to
debian-devel on Mon, 16 Sep 2002 18:52:13 +0100
Drew Daniels
Graduating Dec 2002 and looking for work. My resume is at:
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~umdanie8/resume.html
Reply to: