Re: only release packages that have maintainers?
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 11:44:59PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Brian Russo wrote:
> > I'm not saying you don't have a right to upload -qa packages or any
> > such thing. What I don't understand is if you really think they're
> > useful, why you don't adopt them outright (no, not adopt then RFA).
> >
> > One of the present tasks of the -qa team is maintaining orphaned
> > packages, but beyond a certain point, they must be dropped.
> >
> > Benefits of removing 50 crappy packages:
> > o. Number of bugs in general goes down.
> > o. Users are confronted with less crap to install
> > o. Fewer collisions in the package name/file system namespace.
> > o. Less load on BTS, ftp archives, mirrors, et al.
>
> We are talking about less than 1% of the packages in Debian, less packages
> than the number of new packages each week.
"how many does it take before it becomes wrong"
>
> > o. Debian has less of a reputation for having old, worthless crappy
> > packages.
>
> When you can say why a package is worthless for everyone I think this is a
> good reason for a removal.
I think I've demonstrated this as best as I can, I'm not promoting
radical removal of packages, you seem to be the only one who has
voiced disagreement, you have the right to an opinion certainly.
>
> > o. QA team can (maybe) spend time ACTUALLY doing QA instead of
> > maintaining old, worthless packages that nobody visibly cares about.
>
> I want to spend time on this packages to avoid them getting removed.
Well that's fine, if you think Debian is better served by supporting
older packages, instead of working on newer, active ones, have at
it.
>
> > o. If they're crappy worthless packages, what's the real benefit of
> > having them any? And WHY hadn't they been adopted ages ago?
>
> Not every user is a developer?
why don't we email debian-user and see if anyone cares then?
I don't see mountains of letters pouring in from users asking that
we fix up these packages, if there were heck I'd probably adopt
more.
> > one last thought, it seems accepted that its ok for maintainers to
> > ask for their packages to be removed, if this is true, would anyone
> > object if i adopted a package then asked for its removal?
> > i know this is silly, but then i think this whole thread is silly.
>
> The day after the package was removed I can send an ITP and upload a new
> package where I'm the maintainer and you can't stop this package from
> being in Debian again...
and then you'd immediately orphan/RFA it?
i would have no objection if someone adopts them
outright and improves them, rather than letting them
bleed slowly to death.
> Sorry, are we kids and everyone of us wants to be the most clever kid or
> are we intelligent adults?
kids/adults, silly outdated concept (promoted by adults).
hm, so no comments on my Historical Society eh.
...
I guess you'll have it your way then.
Cruft remains, Debian (and it's users lose), IMO.
you still haven't given a good reason that these packages remain,
except that its "your preference", clearly it should bear weight out
of the hundreds of developers who have almost unanimously said "I
don't care" and ignored these packages. IMO
I don't want to perpetuate this thread anymore, ciao.
--
Brian Russo <brusso@phys.hawaii.edu>
Debian/GNU Linux <wolfie@debian.org> http://www.debian.org
LPSG "member" <wolfie@lpsg.org> http://www.lpsg.org
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Reply to: