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

Re: 642371 to Should the scim-bridge package be removed?



On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 00:09:22 +0000
Dale Amon <amon@vnl.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:27:22PM +0000, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > Processing commands for control@bugs.debian.org:
> > 
> > > retitle 642371 Should this package be removed?
> > Bug #642371 [src:scim-bridge] RM: scim-bridge -- ROM; dead upstream, unmaintained, RC bugs, unfit for KDE4/QT4
> > Changed Bug title to 'Should this package be removed?' from 'RM: scim-bridge -- ROM; dead upstream, unmaintained, RC bugs, unfit for KDE4/QT4'
> > > retitle 637066 Should this package be removed?
> > Bug #637066 [src:gramofile] RM: gramofile -- RoM; unmaintained upstream, low popcon
> > Changed Bug title to 'Should this package be removed?' from 'RM: gramofile -- RoM; unmaintained upstream, low popcon'
> > > thanks
> > Stopping processing here.
> > 
> > Please contact me if you need assistance.
> > -- 
> > 637066: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637066
> > 642371: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=642371
> > Debian Bug Tracking System
> > Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
> 
> Answer to topic: NO!!!! Unless someone intends to write new software
> to parse tapes and record tracks into individual wav files...

Unless someone intends to look after the existing software and maintain
it within Debian then the answer will be yes - remove it. Fix it or let
it be removed due to inaction. Simple.

Unmaintained software which is dead upstream and has not been ported to
updated libraries in Debian is always a candidate for removal.

Those who care about this software need to step up and do the work.
That's all there is to it. It's not enough to just protest or complain -
unless someone does the work, the package remains a candidate for
removal. The RC bugs mentioned originally don't seem to be open any
longer, so there is time for the work to be done.

If the work isn't done, I'll reassign the removal bug myself.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: pgp566HxPXMxP.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: