From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EX16Z-0008LG-5m for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 18:43:31 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jA1IghOL025398; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:42:43 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jA1IeroZ015135 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:40:54 GMT Received: from d165091.adsl.hansenet.de ([80.171.165.91] helo=iglu.bnet.local) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1EX141-0004zM-HU for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 18:40:53 +0000 From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] quixote currently unmaintained Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 19:40:44 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <20051031214102.GA22683@bmb24.uth.tmc.edu> <200511011804.19446.carlo@gentoo.org> <20051101174316.GA13355@cerberus.oppresses.us> In-Reply-To: <20051101174316.GA13355@cerberus.oppresses.us> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2189969.bziB9kVY5s"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200511011940.50248.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: f41acb68-6358-4acf-a329-750446597cb6 X-Archives-Hash: e33966327ac5e3046dbd8f13a64f808d --nextPart2189969.bziB9kVY5s Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 01 November 2005 18:43, Jon Portnoy wrote: > You are technically correct in the sense that there is literally no > policy stating "keep unmaintained stuff in the repository." All I wanted to say is that we have no policy about it and a fair share of= =20 rotten ebuilds in the repository reflects this. I do not say we should remo= ve=20 every (temporarily) unmaintained package, nor do I care about exactly this= =20 one, but at least grant does it in this case and advises to remove it, if n= o=20 one is willing to take it. Now we can hear voices "no, someone could miss=20 it", instead just taking over maintainership.=20 The bottom line: No one really needs to take care of the packages they=20 maintain and those who do, get the reply not to do. Oh, if Grant just had=20 (against policy) removed the package silently as others did here and there = =2D=20 probably no one had bothered. Carsten --nextPart2189969.bziB9kVY5s Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDZ7ayVwbzmvGLSW8RAvZRAJwM42w7fEdXI8Hmuv61E5r9VB6+OwCeLYo0 SuECQtcynOcbs2j2AMHuoj0= =ehA4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2189969.bziB9kVY5s-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list