Web lists-archives.com

Re: Removing packages perhaps too aggressively?




On 01/02/18 09:45, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> On 01/02/18 09:40, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> Andrej Shadura writes:
>>> On 31/01/18 21:01, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>>>>> Here you go, there's #871004 for you. Missed jessie, stretch,
>>>>> not in testing, no uploads since the beginning of 2017.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think you'll get much sympathy for a package being removed
>>>> from unstable when it hasn't shipped with a Debian release since
>>>> Wheezy, and has continuously been out of Testing for 3.5 years.
>>>
>>> True, it hasn't. But if you look a little bit closer, you'll see both RC
>>> bugs it had were quite trivial to fix: two sourceless files (would be
>>> fixed by linking them to the packaged versions instead), and an failed
>>> attempt to download a build-dep (actually, fixed by an NMU while fixing
>>> another bug, just never marked as done).
>>
>> So there was plenty of time to fix them.
>>
>> Why would filing a third RC bug (the "proposed-RM") and waiting one
>> month more change anything?  Why would someone turn up to fix them now?
> 
> Why not? I *was* already doing just that, but with an RM bug filed
> elsewhere, I was unable to know it's about to be removed. I would have
> reacted and closed it before the package's got removed.

Doesn't the PTS^Wtracker service already do that? I.e. notify when an RM bug is
opened. At least it warns on the web interface, and I think I have seen email
notifications about it too. So you only need to subscribe to those packages that
interest you.

Cheers,
Emilio