* Sam Hocevar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030705 14:50]: > On Sat, Jul 05, 2003, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > is it usefull/ok to close old RFP/ITP-entrys? "old" means for me more > > than year since the last mail for ITP, and 2 years for RFP. Of course > > I would write mail first whether the package is still wanted > I do not think old RFPs should be closed, at least on the sole basis > that they are old. Even if the submitter is no longer interested, other > people may be, and there is no way to know how many they are. > > A clean-up is probably needed though, for instance #186174 (xyzzy) > is a rather silly RFP, it should at most be a wishlist bug for whatever > console games package we have. It's much more difficult to make an cleanup on a not formal criterium, and almost impossible for myself. However, if I ask in mail this mail would also be forwarded to debian-wnpp, and any reader there could answers that a package seems usefull and therefore the RFP should not be closed. So I think this is fair enough and if neither the original requester nor any reader of debian-wnpp sees need for a package it really doesn't need to be packaged any more. To Marc: You are right, ITPs should be treated as RFPs in this case and retitled accordingly. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
