On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:07:04AM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:29:50PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > It is becoming increasingly painful to do QA work due to the number of > > packages in unstable that have been completely broken for a long time. > > indeed. Yes. They generate a lot of noise for several team, even if they are then ignored it still takes time to look at them at least once to decide they are to be ignored… > > I propose the following process: > > - I would file a bug against each of those packages, asking whether it > > should be removed, and stating that the bug should be closed if the > > package should stay in Debian. > > - after a month, I would reassign/retitle the bugs that are still open > > to ftp.debian.org to request the package removal. > > > > I don't plan to argue: if someone cares enough about the package to > > close the bug, so be it. > > I'm totally in favor of this plan. A simple mail will except packages from > removal plus even if it happened, it's trivial to reintroduce them via reuploading > from snapshot.d.o. Please, go ahead with this great plan. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature