Re: Request removal of cadvisor?
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 10:56 PM Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> wrote:
>
> Shengjing Zhu <zhsj@debian.org> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 7:30 PM Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> wrote:
> >> Shengjing Zhu, what do you think, can we request removal of this package
> >> from unstable?
> >>
> >
> > Why would you bother with packages that are only in unstable?
> > I'm not sure how best to handle removal for team maintained packages.
> > I'm not the one who introduced this package. It's just a leaf package.
> > So leave it in unstable and if someone wants to pick it up, they don't
> > need to go through the NEW queue.
> > Previously I only requested removal of some team maintained packages
> > that upstream are gone, and I'm pretty sure they will not be used any
> > more.
>
> Okay, I understand. It makes it a bit hard to tell if a new version of
> a package that cadvisor depends on causes the build failure or if it was
> there before. Maybe if a package already FTBFS then causing another
> FTBFS in it is not worth checking for.
>
> Perhaps we can just collectively establish a list of packages that we no
> longer care about as a team, and cadvisor seems to be one, and not let
> problems with it stop progress on other packages.
IMO, it's well established, not only for go-team, packages that are
not in testing wouldn't block others.
--
Shengjing Zhu
Reply to: