Heads up; F22 will require applications to ship appdata to be listed in software center
kevin at scrye.com
Thu Jan 23 23:19:11 UTC 2014
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:08:13 -0800
Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> 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.
I think the problem would be coming up with a acceptable criteria for
detecting 'truely abandoned' packages.
I mean, I'm a maintainer for the Fedora apg package.
Last upstream release was 2003. I very rarely touch it.
Yet, from time to time I still use it here, I suspect, but do not know
that others install and use it.
It has no bugs currently opened against it.
It's not failed a mass rebuild.
The last time I touched it was to move it to use systemd unit files
(it can optionally run a network service to return it's data).
Is this a package that should be removed for being abandoned?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the devel