>> I had to let your message sink in.... > > Hm, did I write something weird or hard to grind? If so, I'd try to rephrase > my point. No, more about what it meant for me. > Eventually, such a popularity could be explained as 'past glory'; it was > popular once, but with the advent of more advanced windowing/widget/ui > toolkits it probably still stays on user machines largely unused and mostly > obsoleted. Understood and exactly what I thought. > IMO, lesstif and dependents are far beyond their life cycle, and I'm not > at all sure if I personally want to see them in our next stable release. That > is my opinion, other might disagree. Absolutely fine with me. But maybe Debian should decide on that (lesstif is specifically mentioned in the policy btw) and just request the removal of the package (and it dependents). If so I won't need to pull a dead horse, and move on to other things as well. My interest was with Debian, not specifically with lesstif or any of its dependents. I do have the time and the will to invest in FOSS/Debian, but maybe I decided on the wrong project? I don't necessarily want to get new packages in so I decided to adopt, but how to chose? > Okay, I respect your point and your time. I just tried to give some pointers > eventually to explain the lack of interest of your prospective sponsors. Point taken. I will do what I want to do with lesstif next weekend/weeks and if nobody steps up to sponsor I will leave it on mentors and on Alioth and just provide a package at Launchpad [1] for a while. A side note: I do have the feeling that Debian is not so well in removing packages that are over age. Shouldn't there be a policy on that as well? More than just RC bugs that warrant their removal around release time? Getting a new package in when there already exist a package which is similar is difficult, but removing one is apparently not lightly done either. Paul [1] https://launchpad.net/~paul-climbing/+archive/lesstif+nedit
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature