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

Re: RFO: crystalspace, RC buggy > 1yr w/patch, not in oldstable/stable



Steve Langasek wrote:
crystalspace has been failing to build on alpha for > 1yr, even though a
patch has been available in the BTS for 6 months today.  Previous versions
of the package built fine on all architectures, making this a serious
regression and preventing the package's inclusion in a stable release (or in
testing).

Christian, are you still interested in maintaining this package, or should
it be orphaned/removed from the archive (along with crystalspace-data)?

If there's a reason the package should not be orphaned, I can do an NMU for
bug #358044 (and 399843) as previously suggested (by someone who apparently
wasn't a DD), but if the package isn't actually being maintained I'd rather
not fix these bugs just to clear the way for an unmaintained package to
enter testing.

<2p>
I feel that CrystalSpace is such an interesting application that it should not be removed from the archive if at all possible. If it is in such a buggy state, which I well believe from the last time I looked at it, then clearly we don't want it to enter testing yet. There should be an RFH out on it. Forgive me, I am rather too pressed to go and look right now.
</2p>

cheers,

tim
/|\



Reply to: