Re: Improving our response to "duplicate" packages in Debian
Michael Hanke writes ("Re: Improving our response to "duplicate" packages in Debian"):
> I think this is approaching the problem from the wrong end. Instead of
> preserving the status quo and asking oracles to predict the future we
> should have better means of _removing_ software that has proven to be
> inferior of an equivalent alternative in Debian. The advantage is that
> we have objective criteria to be able to make an informed decision --
> not a guess based on heuristics and opinion. The disadvantage is that it
> imposes work on other volunteers -- but see below...
We apparently already have people who are willing to put in work to
try to trim the contents of Debian to packages which are worthwhile,
in some sense.
Perhaps one way of reading this thread is as a request that those
people respond a bit differently the appearance of an ITP for a
package where there is similar functionality in Debian already; a
request that those wanting a leaner better Debian should take it as a
prompt to look at some of those other, existing, packages and see
whether any of them should be removed ?
If so I'm not sure I agree with that, but it would certainly be nice
if those complaining about ITPs looked at the other similar packages
in Debian already to try to actually form an opinion about the
relative merits of the old and the new.
Ian.
Reply to: