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

Re: 185 Packages that look orphaned

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004, Jan Kesten wrote:

I'm not sure if the following attributions are correct, but that is what
was in the note...

> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Hi Goswin!
> | 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.
> | If you maintain one of thses packages then tell me (including the
> | names of packages you maintain) during the next week. If you are using
> | one of these packages and could maintain (or NMU some fixes) you
> | should contact the maintainer and me to work things out. If I hear
> | nothing about a package soon I will start with the oldest and do a few
> | packages every day.

hrm, I've not seen the original message yet :(

> I use these (under debian and solaris) and if there is some need for
> some work (i.e. as maintainer) I would try to spend some work (in
> fact I get paid during my studying for getting at least 3270 an

I do, however use daily (and maintain) the 3270 series of packages.
I count 3 open bugs (yeah, one is serious - I've to remail the upstream)
one should be closed because its been almost a year without any response
from the submitter - and I can't test it locally... and nothing in the way
FTBFS so I'm kinda stumped that it shows up on whatever this list is...

What am I missing ?
Rick Nelson
<``Erik> 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 is a big number

Reply to: