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

Re: FTE directory listing

On Mon, 17 Sep 2012 11:18:39 +0100
Sian Mountbatten <poenikatu@fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

> Dear Maintainer

 * The maintainer for orphaned packages like fte is a mailing list.

 * Questions on mailing lists will tend to get forgotten. 

 * Feature requests for orphaned packages should be recorded as wishlist
bugs against the package. 

 * Wishlist bugs in orphaned packages are not often closed without an
existing, tested, patch.

 * Orphaned packages, by definition, do not have anyone in particular to
do ongoing development and issues, if fixed at all, are done on a
fire-fighting / fly-by basis.

 * If an orphaned package is to get any ongoing maintenance, it will
need to be adopted and that usually means adopting the upstream
development as well.

All of this is discernible from the PTS for the package (linked from
the BTS) and from the content of qa.debian.org which is listed as the
maintainer for orphaned packages.

> Is it possible to change the directory listing given by FTE such that
>    (1) A sub-directory is marked with a d
>    (2) The mode of files is correctly displayed
> Unfortunately, I am not familiar with C++ otherwise I would consider 
> doing it myself.

Therefore, based on the above, the likely answer to your question is
no. If you file a bug, maybe someone might do it in some random time
period but I wouldn't count on it. If you don't file a bug, the chances
of this being done are zero.

I did the last QA upload of fte and I am not proposing to do another
any time soon. I will certainly not be doing *any* QA uploads until
Wheezy is released, other than to close RC bugs. This issue is NOT RC.
If fte had an RC bug filed against it, I would be more likely to remove
the package than spend any particular effort fixing it because it is
obvious that nobody has cared enough about fte to adopt it in the year
since the QA upload.


Neil Williams

Attachment: pgpBya37L5kkk.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: