From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1S9jyk-0006XW-Fu for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:18:58 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F0D34E0A85; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:18:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31930E077F for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:18:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [193.66.90.24] (GGYYKMMMDCXXIV.gprs.sl-laajakaista.fi [193.66.90.24]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ssuominen) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 42EE96415A for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:18:12 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F67A273.2030204@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 23:17:39 +0200 From: Samuli Suominen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120316 Thunderbird/11.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs due iluxa retirement References: <1332094529.21995.11.camel@belkin4> <4F66CC9F.3050007@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: f3725476-bdef-4ebd-9341-ea2edf4df348 X-Archives-Hash: c70e91e3967ed946197774cec2653f00 On 03/19/2012 11:00 PM, David Leverton wrote: > On 19 March 2012 06:05, Samuli Suominen wrote: >> dev-cpp/cppserv would need working dev-cpp/sptk and we have none: >> >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402149#c9 >> >> the only working versions got marked as "obsolete" by upstream due to >> "undisclosed reasons" whatever that means >> > > Not that I personally care, but it seems like this could be "solved" > by just removing fltk support, rather than nuking it completely. > don't think we should be "clinging on" the unmaintained packages that badly from general overview of the sptk homepage, the whole point of the package seems to be around fltk (and thus, X) and from broader view... sometimes it seems the politics around package removal has become a burden, rather than a tool