Re: Woody retrospective and Sarge introspective
Andreas Tille wrote:
> The fact is that there are packages missing from woody which were contained
> in potato. The BTS leaves no trace about any bug of the package and there
> is no single bit of documentation about this fact and this really sucks.
The names of these packages should probably be contributed to the
release notes, which has a section on removed packages:
> If I would have recived an answer from RM: "Sorry this problem is unimportant/
> irrelevant/..." I could have set up an archive of those packages under
> people.debian.org and write a bit of documentation for those small number
> of people. Not the best solution but would be completely appropriate
> for all parties.
There was a proposal to have an RM assistant to help the RM with such
things. Is somebody confident volunteering and would aj like to work
together with that person?
> I just looking for a solution for two items:
> 1. How to handle those silently removed packages?
--> Release Notes
> 2. How to ensure that we were not faced to those problems for
> further releases?
An RMA may be helpful but doesn't imply that the problem won't exist
in future releases.
Life is too short to run proprietary software. -- Bdale Garbee