Re: A Round of Removals (addendum)
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 11:21:23PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Le Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 02:10:46PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG ?crivait:
> > jmarant@nerim.net (J?r?me Marant) writes:
> > > Two of those packages are mine. I'm still active and waiting for upstream
> > > fixes. Should I stay and watch my packages being removed from unstable
> > > and testing?
> > Are the bugs really release critical? If so, why do you think the
> > packages should be released?
> Anthony explicitely said he would remove the package from unstable.
> Removing them from testing is enough to not release them.
>
> I agree that we should get rid of the unmaintained cruft. But requiring
> a fix within one week is not a good way to detect "unmaintained cruft".
> A good way to do this is to mail all the bugs in question and ask for a reply.
> No reply => removal.
All the bugs I looked at were numbered less than #150000, which means they
were filed no later than mid-June. If a package has security bugs that've
been outstanding for four and half months that we still don't have a fix
for, it's not maintained well enough -- whether the fault's upstream
or with the Debian maintainer -- for inclusion in the archive.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Reply to: