On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:55 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 23.01.2014 16:49, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
>
> On 01/23/2014 01:48 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> So, one possibility would be to move less-maintained packages to a separate
>> repository tree still included as Fedora and enabled by default
>
> That wont reduce the bugs reported against it...
well, why not remove all packages so no bugs get reported at all?
consider packages for removal because upstream does not jump around
and release at least once per year a new version is.... hmmm... i
must not say the words in public....
I think this discussion is going down a needlessly divisive path that it
doesn't need to at all.
The discussion is assuming we have precisely two choices:
* Rigidly and with no exceptions throw out software which meets some
arbitrary approximations for determining 'maintained or abandoned'
* Change nothing
I don't think that's true at all. Would anyone on either side of the
debate object to an approach which tried to identify software that was
truly abandoned either up- or down-stream - not just 'software that no
longer required changing' - and throw that out?
I'm sure there's at least a certain amount of low-hanging fruit that
no-one would really mind getting rid of.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net