Orphaning cantus3 [was: Re: Upcoming removals]

[Igor Stroh <igor@rulim.de>]

Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Igor Stroh <igor@rulim.de> [2005-05-06 22:10]:
>
> > > > From what I can tell, cantus3 doesn't actually provide all of the
> > > functionality originally present in cantus.
> >
> > And it won't either -- the upstream is unresponsive and seems to
> > have no interest neither in incorporating bug fixes nor in adding
> > features which the package formerly claimed to be offering[0].
>
>
> > I'd suggest to remove cantus3 from the archive if it wouldn't
> > have so many users (according to popcon.d.o) - there are better
>
>
> Has there been any agreement about what to do with cantus and cantus3?
> Since you're the maintainer of cantus3 and you suggest it's removal,
> can you go ahead and file a bug report on ftp.d.o?

I don't like the idea of removing cantus3 right away, maybe there's 
someone who's actually using it and is willing to take over its' 
maintenance.

Anyone up to adopt it?

If nobody speaks up, I'll request a removal.

> Should cantus be removed too?

Yes, imho it's outdated. I'll file a bug report against ftp.d.o.

Cheers,
Igor