On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 09:13:30AM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Further, it's still not clear why these packages should be kept in sid,
> > if they aren't suitable for woody and no one is interested in
> > maintaining them.
> I think it is no valit assumption that no one is interested in
> maintaining them just because they are not maintained. Perhaps some
> time constraints prevent maintainers from taking those packages.
It takes, what, twenty minutes to upload a package with the Maintainer:
field changed? A few hours every couple of months are enough to keep
it fairly adequately maintained. If the packages aren't worth that much
time from anyone, they're not worth keeping.
> So I see no problem to let the packages stay in sid and do not
> remove "the knowledge how to package them bug free". This is
> a valuable resource and does not harm anything.
It uses up disk space on auric and the mirrors, it clutters the BTS,
it makes the WNPP harder to manage, it makes update_excuses harder
to follow...
Also, "the knowledge how to package them bug free" is rarely particularly
valuable.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``BAM! Science triumphs again!''
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif
Attachment:
pgpmIl4Stw1_o.pgp
Description: PGP signature