Package with no upstream (ftp)

[David Cantrell]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:10:20AM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote:
> On 07/18/2012 10:43 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 10:19 +0200, Jan Synacek wrote:
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> what should I do with the spec file of a package (ftp) with no upstream and no upstream source?
> >> I mean the URL and Source0 lines. Should I just let them there, put a note in a comment or
> >> just remove them?
> > 
> > Upload it to fedorahosted, gitorious, github, or whatever.  Even if
> > you're the only person with access initially, it's still useful as a
> > possible code sharing mechanism with other distributions, etc.  And
> > who knows, maybe someone will come along and submit patches.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Sounds reasonable. Thank you.

Or forget the netkit source.  I'd like to see ftp(1) replaced with the
NetBSD ftp client:

ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/tnftp/

Used to be called lukemftp a long time ago.  Much nicer than netkit ftp
but still simple and works like people expect the BSD ftp(1) command to
work.

-- 
David Cantrell <dcantrell at redhat.com>
Supervisor, Installer Engineering Team
Red Hat, Inc. | Westford, MA | EST5EDT