On 05/31/2012 04:52 PM, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > On 31/05/12 16:40, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> On 05/31/2012 08:43 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >>> I have no intention of spreading or amplifying wrong information. >>> >>> Do I understand it correctly that your intention in your original >>> post was to have the package orphaned and then have a team take >>> over maintainance? >>> >> >> I was also pointing out that the package was anyway badly maintained, >> and that in such case, we have to do something about it. >> > > Please note that "badly maintained" is something quite different from > "not maintained". AFAICS, the package we are talking about is not > affected by severe or critical bugs.
The number of bugs says nothing about a package being maintained or not. Maybe just nobody uses it anymore because it is too old? 'Please package the current upstream version'-bugs are wishlist only, unfortunately. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fc7a889.1090...@bzed.de
