Re: removing libdb 4.3
On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 02:32:50PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 10:24 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 04:59:03PM +0000, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > > I completely agree that libdb4.3 is ancient grot, and it should be
> > > removed from the archive.
> > > I am distressed that the maintainers decided to wait until the freeze to
> > > do that. This is entirely *backwards*. The time to decide, "hey, this
> > > library should be removed" is at the *beginning* of the release cycle,
> > > not at the end.
> > FWIW bugs were filed way before the start of the freeze. We're only
> > discussing several months old bugs afaict. So it seems that your rant is
> > off. Also debian-release is not a discussion list, and such a post
> > should be on -devel. TIA.
> Actually, no, you're wrong. The bug was filed against mmorph on
> September 29. Please pay attention.
It would be easier to "pay attention" if your message had given any
indication this was the package you were referring to. As far as I could
tell, this was a continuation of the reprepro discussion in the new
thread.
The bug on mmorph was not filed by the db maintainers, it was filed by a
release manager. I guess mmorph was overlooked when the db maintainers
filed bugs requesting migration to db4.6 a year ago. That's unfortunate,
but it's not a reason to keep db4.3 around in lenny when we can easily
dispense with it.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Reply to: