On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 08:51:32AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > I should note that it has 30-something popcon installation and that the > "available fork" has been in there for more than two years and in > particular for a full release cycle. There is no reason for the Debian > project to keep old, unmaintained (hey, your package was uninstallabe for > more than a year without you giving two seconds of thought to it) junk > around just because the people not maintaining it don't offer the > migration plan that noone else will implement for the thirty people who > didn't notice it's obsolete. As for the popcon stats you should not equate them with the *real* number of users. In my experience popcon stats are useful to compare popularity between packages, not to measure with precision the userbase. If you take just the 'base' packages (such as dpkg [1]) you will note the popcon stats are probably two or three orders of magnitude *below* the real user population. As for the unistallable problem due to the libphp-plot fiasco (402406), quite sincerely, you don't know whether I did or did not give seconds thoughts to it. The ball was on another's court and I did not have the need to fix it. > Saying you don't have time for it "right know" is quite outrageous. It is not, I'm doing many other Debian stuff which is higher priority than this package. > acidlab hasn't even had the chance to get any serious testing in lenny > because it wasn't available, so Debian shouldn't release it. No-one cared > to implement a transition path during at any time during the release > cycle, it must not be such a great priority. Acidlab does not really need any "serious testing" the codebase has been stable for ages. The changes in the Debian package have either been: - Dependencies fixes - po-debconf translations That being said, I'm not discussing whether it should be released with lenny or not, although I think we should since the (few) users that are still using acidlab will still get a better package (and a chance to upgrade from sarge) with the one right now in sid. I'm discussing whether this package should be removed from the archive or not. I'm *not* in favor of removing it right now. Regards Javier [1] 76.892 people reporting that they are using dpkg, as of today http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=dpkg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature