[gentoo-dev] Re: last rite of dev-python/elixir

[gentoo-dev] Re: last rite of dev-python/elixir

[Duncan]

IAN DELANEY posted on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:55:16 +0800 as excerpted:

> # Ian Delaney <idella4@gentoo.org> (06 Jun 2013)
> # Masked for removal in ~ 30 days. Upstream inactive dev-python/elixir

Where's the bug reference one would normally expect to see with such an 
announcement?

AFAIK, simply inactive upstream hasn't traditionally been enough to 
trigger removal, as long as the package still builds and has no serious 
bugs, and is still either legally mirrored and redistributable, or 
remains legally available from an otherwise inactive upstream.

Of course if there's serious bugs (including that it's no longer 
available to build in the first place), that's an entirely different 
matter, but then there should be a reference to such bugs in the 
announcement/mask, and there was no such reference in this case.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rite of dev-python/elixir

[Markos Chandras]

On 6 June 2013 11:32, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> IAN DELANEY posted on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:55:16 +0800 as excerpted:
>
>> # Ian Delaney <idella4@gentoo.org> (06 Jun 2013)
>> # Masked for removal in ~ 30 days. Upstream inactive dev-python/elixir
>
> Where's the bug reference one would normally expect to see with such an
> announcement?
>
> AFAIK, simply inactive upstream hasn't traditionally been enough to
> trigger removal, as long as the package still builds and has no serious
> bugs, and is still either legally mirrored and redistributable, or
> remains legally available from an otherwise inactive upstream.
>
> Of course if there's serious bugs (including that it's no longer
> available to build in the first place), that's an entirely different
> matter, but then there should be a reference to such bugs in the
> announcement/mask, and there was no such reference in this case.
>
> --
> Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
> and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman
>
>

I agree.

If upstream inactivity is the only reason to remove it, then don't!

--
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rite of dev-python/elixir

[Peter Alfredsen]

On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> IAN DELANEY posted on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:55:16 +0800 as excerpted:
>
>> # Ian Delaney <idella4@gentoo.org> (06 Jun 2013)
>> # Masked for removal in ~ 30 days. Upstream inactive dev-python/elixir
>
> Where's the bug reference one would normally expect to see with such an
> announcement?

http://elixir.ematia.de/trac/report/1?asc=0&sort=ticket&USER=anonymous

I'm sure Ian would welcome anyone who's willing to maintain an
ever-expanding patchset as new maintainer.

HTH. HAND.

:-)

/Peter