On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 09:29 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> > and then what ?  if you're proposing removal of packages due solely to no 
> > maintainer, then we're going to have to slap you around.  dont remove 
> > packages for that reason alone.
> > -mike
> 
> So I guess the idea would then be, how do you find packages in the tree
> where dev FooGuy once maintained it but no longer does (because FooGuy
> left) and the package is old and nasty and no one cares about it.  Leave
> it in the tree anyway?  I certainly don't want unmaintained CRAP in the
> tree, although unmaintained decent programs are good.  By decent I mean
> programs that are generally so old they never have version bumps ;)

The simple rule is leave it the hell alone.  If it is completely broken,
there will be bugs filed.  If nobody steps up to claim the package,
then, and only then, is it removed.

Did you look at the list of packages?  I mean, how exactly broken can
"descent1-maps" get?  *grin*

Package removal because it has no maintainer would probably remove a
large portion of the tree, possibly even packages that are necessary for
many people.  There's quite a few packages that get maintained simply by
people fixing problems with them, but with no real "maintainer".  While
this isn't the best solution, removing them from the tree just for this
reason is asinine.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux