potentially unmaintained packages
mschwendt at gmail.com
Wed Apr 14 11:58:04 UTC 2010
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:20:05 +0200, Felix wrote:
> >> "Hey, this pkg hasn't been built, even in rawhide, in a while, maybe you
> >> should 1. check that out and 2. if the pkg is dead or unmaintained
> >> consider retiring it."
> > It's stable, works, and is still being used by dependencies. Would I
> > rebuild just for fun (and possibly introduce bugs related to temporary
> > issues with compilation, RPM, or other build deps)?
> Again, there really is no need to. And Seth didn't say that there is a
> need to do so. I think he really tried hard to make his point of the
> list not having any implications.
Too many words in his message, too many sentences that imply something.
The last sentence of the message would have been enough, IMO.
> For my part I found this list quite useful because I almost forgot that
> I took over rubyripper some time ago.
Then you might find the following web interface helpful:
> I had some issues with it lately and I almost filed a bug for it. I can
> just imagine the hilarity if that bug would have been assigned to myself
> directly ;)
> So just see this list as a service that you _can_ use. But you aren't
> required to use this service.
Sure it's useful somehow. I didn't mean to say it wouldn't be useful.
All the extra comments in the message just made me wonder.
> Thanks Seth.
The list doesn't cover packages that have been (re)built, but suffer
from many issues as covered by ageing bugzilla tickets which have not been
commented on by the package maintainer.
More information about the devel