Hi Adrian, Adrian Bunk wrote: > hotot is orphaned, not in stable and has several non-trivial RC bugs. > > In #728578 you asked for some time for seeing whether any of the forks > persists. > > My impression is that none of these forks seems to be really active,
I just reviewed them and disagree: https://github.com/sudaraka/Hotot/commits/master has commits from less than 6 months ago and includes commits from one of the other forks. I consider that as "active". Anyways, anyone who plans to adopt or reintroduce hotot (once it has been removed), should review https://github.com/sudaraka/Hotot/network and look for the most active forks. So far, the fork by sudaraka seems to be the most active one in the past year. > and that there is no point in keeping a dead package that already > didn't make it into the previous stable. > > Do you agree? Only partially. I disagree that it's (completely) dead, but I agree that it doesn't make sense to keep it in unstable if nobody cares about the RC bugs. > If not, would you adopt the package? Nope. I already have quite a lot of packages and other packages in need are definitely more important to me. And I'm not a Python guru. I currently see corebird as acceptable alternative although I find the GNOME-style UI design annoying. Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 `- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
