Re: Bug#895246: gconf: Intent to Adopt
- Date: Sun, 13 May 2018 15:18:04 -0400
- From: Jeremy Bicha <jbicha@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Bug#895246: gconf: Intent to Adopt
On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 06:47:41PM -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
>> Why? Basically there are only two things left in Buster that depend on
>> gconf: eclipse and pulseaudio.
> Plus ~ 50 more in unstable.
>> Please be more specific about what software you are interested in that
>> requires gconf and why it can't be ported away from gconf this year.
> As I wrote:
> It is not a good service to our users to rip gconf support
> out of many packages for buster.
> This should be reverted in the packages where it was already done,
> shipping castrated packages in buster where the package in stretch was
> fully functional is not good, especially since there is no problem that
> would make it non-trivial to ship gconf in buster.
I don't think you really addressed my request: Which specific packages
have been removed from Testing solely because of gconf that you
believe should be in Buster and what is the reason they can't be
ported away from gconf this year?
By the way, I did announce the gconf removal on this list in February.
 Respectfully, you are the only one complaining about gconf's
It is not a service to our users to keep old libraries and software
around for additional Debian releases just because someone somewhere
might use some of it for something.