Hello
I want to take this opportunity to add that the bugs need to be
addressed, especially the wish list. There are people who send bugs to
request to be added or taken into consideration certain properties and
functionality in the packages and maintainers are ignoring. Another
thing is the system of new packages (debian-mentors,
mentors.debian.net) .. I think that there could be a team dedicated to
addressing this important task, same as the team dedicated to the
kernel, the core packages, translation, among other important packages.
I believe that this significantly affects the quality of the
distribution
El mié, 19-08-2009 a las 08:55 -0300, Rogério Brito escribió:
> Dear all,
>
> Motivated by some unfortunate trends seen in debian-mentors, I would
> like to raise (again) the question of wheter we are doing the right
> thing or not.
>
> Here is my plea:
>
> ,----
> | Attn Debian/Ubuntu/whatever developers and maintainers:
> |
> | It is with sadness that I see many NEW packages uploaded to the Debian
> | repository and little thought about some packages that are already in
> | the distribution, but that are bit-rotting.
> |
> | Please, if an existing package has not been updated for some time, just
> | publicize this fact more conspicuously. Let us engage the existing (and
> | prospective) maintainers in taking care of aging, but still useful
> | packages.
> |
> | If, OTOH, the packages are not useful, or no one is willing to maintain
> | it in Debian, I would propose to remove it as soon as possible from the
> | archives, since they present problems (two of the first that come to
> | mind are: users installing packages that won't work/might break their
> | systems, and the burden of having to worry about security updates).
> |
> | In a certain sense, more *MAINTAINANCE* of programs should be expected
> | from Debian Developers/Maintainers (and not only of packages, but also
> | regarding the ports).
> |
> | Let us take a moment of reflextion regarding the archive as a whole and
> | not just fire up/accept new ITP's and RFS's without taking into
> | consideration the current state (and the Release Critical bug counts) of
> | the existent packages.
> |
> | This is not meant to say that new packages should be unnacepted: just
> | that a second (and third, fourth, etc) thought should be given if you
> | can help improve the Distribution, so that we don't end up with a lot of
> | half-working packages where all but a few are actually usable.
> `----
>
>
> Regards, Rogério Brito.
>
> P.S.: Please, CC'me as I am only subscribed to -mentors, but not -devel.
> --
> Rogério Brito : rbrito@{mackenzie,ime.usp}.br : GPG key 1024D/7C2CAEB8
> http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito : http://meusite.mackenzie.com.br/rbrito
> Projects: algorithms.berlios.de : lame.sf.net : vrms.alioth.debian.org
>
>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente