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

Re: ITA with already removed packages

Hidetaka Iwai wrote:
> I intend to adopt libming etc.  But [1]they are already removed.
> Does anyone tell me whether I should reopen and re-title the old wnpp
> bug #166973, or submit new ITP?
I think it would be best to submit a new ITP, maybe providing a
reference to the RFA/removal bug.

Before you do that, note Colin Watson's reassigning mail, though (it's
the retitling/reassigning email:

> libming and libming-fonts-openoffice have been orphaned for over a
> year; during that time there appear to have been perhaps a dozen
> commits to upstream's CVS repository, and my impression is that it's
> not particularly actively maintained there. libming has no reverse
> dependencies that I can see other than libming-fonts-openoffice, and
> vice versa.

> libming currently has two grave bugs, one of which indicates that it
> needs source changes to make it work with the current PHP API.

Unless you can address all of these (upstream presumed dead and the
grave bugs), you should (IMHO) not reintroduce the package as lack of
upstream does not enhance quality.
You might also want to consult the previous Debian maintainer, Erich
Schubert, and check out libflash as an alternative.

Kind regards


Thomas Viehmann, <http://beamnet.de/tv/>

Attachment: pgpAcCFCJiXda.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: