Re: Development standards for unstable
* Frank Küster (firstname.lastname@example.org) [060112 19:36]:
> Andreas Barth <email@example.com> wrote:
> > * Frank Küster (firstname.lastname@example.org) [060112 18:11]:
> >> Andreas Barth <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> > * Christoph Berg (firstname.lastname@example.org) [060112 16:28]:
> >> >> Re: Thomas Viehmann in <[🔎] 43C66766.email@example.com>
> >> >> > Really, how about just automatically removing orphaned packages
> >> >> > without maintained rdepends from testing?
> >> >>
> >> >> Seconded.
> >> >
> >> > well, just make a list that I can just copy into my hint file.
> >> Hm, I can't find the context: Are you talking about all such packages,
> >> or only packages with RC bugs?
> > The ones that are orphaned for some time. If we see it doesn't work or
> > is not worth, we can change that back of course.
> I can't see why removing an orphaned package that has no RC bugs, and
> let's say, even no important bugs, and which is stable in the sense that
> there's no new upstream version (e.g. an established font), from testing
> makes testing's quality better. What about a hypothetical package that
> has no bugs at all, but some users according to popcon?
One can try to come up with some metric, yes.
However, on the other hand feel free to create a "common maintained
packages team" that adopts such packages :)