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

Re: 185 Packages that look orphaned

Nathanael Nerode <> writes:

> >I looked through the differences between testing and unstable and
> >picked out everything older than 100 days. Reasons why those packages
> >are not in testing are:
> >
> >- non-free / contrib packages nobody tried to compile
> Don't be too hard on these; getting them compiled on all arches has
> been next to impossible for quite a while.  :-/ Frankly, the
> practical advice I'd give is to stop making these Architecture: all.
> :-(

Maybe we could make a list of packages that should be autobuild in
contrib/non-free and distribute that to the buildds.

Or rather make a list of packages not to be build and allow
contrib/non-free in general, since the buildds have that mechanism

> >- FTBFS or RC bugs
> Don't include packages with "Keep this out of testing" RC bugs.

Too lazy to look at every package, sorry. I don't expect experimental
packages to be >100 days old without a new upload. I will detect them
before acting on orphaning them.

> >- possibly failure of the testing script to detect it
> >- other packages hold you back (get involved in those other packages)
> Don't be too hard on these; people are often unaware of their dependency
> chains; and also some packages have been stuck in four or more different
> dependency chains, which can be a real pain in the neck.

Well, now they are aware that its a problem.

> >Noone has cared enough about these packages to get them compiled,
> >fixed or pushed into sarge so I am assuming the packages don't have a
> >caring maintainer or fan community. Ergo they should be orphaned.
> Minus the situations I commented on above.
> <snip>
> >If I hear nothing about a package soon I will start with the oldest and do a 
> >few packages every day.
> I strongly advise starting by only orphaning those packages with RC bugs open 
> longer than a week (and without "keep this out of testing" bugs).  Please 
> give the others a break for now, as some of them may actually be maintained, 
> and at any rate they deserve closer scrutiny.

All packages listed are between 1000 and 100 days old. I suspect any
bugs on those are roughly the same age. A fresher bug means there is
at least one person out there using the package, don't worry there.

> You'll have *plenty* to orphan for quite a while if you just do these, which 
> are more definitely unmaintained than the others.
> --Nathanael

Plenty of packages to pick from. :)


Reply to: