Bug#743767: Removing hotot from unstable?
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> hotot is orphaned, not in stable and has several non-trivial RC bugs.
> In #728578 you asked for some time for seeing whether any of the forks
> My impression is that none of these forks seems to be really active,
I just reviewed them and disagree:
https://github.com/sudaraka/Hotot/commits/master has commits from less
than 6 months ago and includes commits from one of the other forks. I
consider that as "active".
Anyways, anyone who plans to adopt or reintroduce hotot (once it has
been removed), should review https://github.com/sudaraka/Hotot/network
and look for the most active forks. So far, the fork by sudaraka seems
to be the most active one in the past year.
> and that there is no point in keeping a dead package that already
> didn't make it into the previous stable.
> Do you agree?
Only partially. I disagree that it's (completely) dead, but I agree
that it doesn't make sense to keep it in unstable if nobody cares
about the RC bugs.
> If not, would you adopt the package?
Nope. I already have quite a lot of packages and other packages in
need are definitely more important to me. And I'm not a Python guru.
I currently see corebird as acceptable alternative although I find the
GNOME-style UI design annoying.
,''`. | Axel Beckert <email@example.com>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE