Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser <foser@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1738 bytes --]

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 14:11 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> Are you suggesting that all packages with long standing open bug
> reports should be removed? There are thousands that fit that
> description. If not, then what is your definition of "maintained"? It
> could be argued that since Mike fixed the cccc bug, it is maintained,
> even though he isn't the maintainer. Likewise, there are hundreds of
> packages that have a maintainer listed, or are assigned to a herd,
> where bug reports are essentially ignored. Should those also be
> removed?

No, I don't know why you jump to that conclusion. There are people
responsible there, you can contact them if you feel things are ignored.
Or better, you can try and help out on those outstanding bugs and solve
them, so the maintainers would only need to apply a fix.

> Did you read the previous discussion link I provided? The argument has
> been rejected in the past because it would lead to hundreds of
> otherwise working packages being removed.

You get a lot more out of that thread than I do, I guess it's a matter
of interpretation. 

> Maybe you aren't a native English speaker; it was clear from Mike's
> post that he would rather you didn't go ahead with removing hundreds
> of packages.

I don't know how this relates to my mother tongue, but I'm not speaking
of a mass removal or anything. You make it into that all the time, maybe
you should let go of that mindset. I think that if we come across cases
like this the goal should be to clear up the confusion. Either find a
maintainer or clean it out. That way eventually 'hundreds' becomes
'dozens' of unmaintained packages and maybe some day even less, it's a
gradual process.

- foser

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]