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

Re: Bug#835533: dasher: Please package Dasher 5.0 beta

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:

> I do read the "work-needing" mails, so I would have seen it. There was
> no single mail on the debian-accessibility list about dasher. I didn't
> know it got removed from testing or even that help was requested. Had I
> known it, I would have moved for sure, or at least post a request for
> help on debian-accessibility.
> So it's not active fighting indeed, but from the point of view of a11y
> people it *is* definitely fighting to have to realize that something
> again has fallen down, and have to spend energy into putting it up
> again.
> The case of a11y packages is very particular: their popularity is
> irrelevant, since some people simply *need* them to be able to do any
> kind of work with Debian. Just dropping the package from Debian, saying
> that people who need it will install it by themselves, actually means
> just killing the package: how will the user know about it? How will he
> manage to install it not through the package manager while he is already
> struggling with using the computer?
> So if some of these packages is falling down, the debian-accessibility
> team *has* to be notified so we can find a solution. Maybe we should
> put in the ftp-master process that an RM request for any kind of
> accessibility-related package shouldn't be processed without an ACK from
> the debian-accessibility team?

These kind of issues aren't specific to removal of accessibility
packages; people doing Debian package removal rarely do any due
diligence work before filing removal bugs. Personally, at minimum I
would like to see removalists contacting PTS/tracker/DDPO subscribers,
upstream, any related Debian teams and any related Debian derivatives.



Reply to: