On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 08:35:53PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote: > I think the Haskell Group can take it over. But some questions: Is the > library really needed in Debian (i.e. are there other libraries or > programs using it)? How active is BNFC maintained by upstream? How much > maintenance work was required for bnfc (besides the pure packaging)? There are no dependencies in Debian. But I believe programs generated by BNFC with certain options will require the library, so I would hesitate not packaging the library. Upstream is active but (at least in the past) has been relatively slow, only releasing every couple of years. They've now moved to a more open development style; I don't know if that'll speed things up. From my perspective, bnfc has been low maintenance. Upstream home page is at http://bnfc.digitalgrammars.com/ and Google group at https://groups.google.com/group/bnfc-dev?hl=en Thanks for considering taking it over from me :-) -- Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature