Hello Scott, Scott Kitterman escreveu isso aí: > It looks like there are more than a few Ruby packages that aren't update for > the new packaging scheme and still expect Ruby 1.8 as the default. > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=676092 is an example. If we > weren't in freeze, these sorts of things would be easy enough to fix, but > since > we are ... > > What's the plan for packages like this? Should they be updated for the new > Ruby package policy and sent through New? Should they be removed?
In general, I think untransitioned Ruby packages should be "tolerated" for Wheezy, but not for Wheezy+1. That is, if a package that was not transitioned and it's still worthy of being released with Wheezy has RC bugs, then I think we should fix it without transitioning. If the package is not useful anymore, then I think it's better to remove it. This package in particular is so obsolete that it doesn't even have a proper Ruby build system, does not have a standard source structure (e.g. lib/ and friends). It also has very low popcon¹, so it should probably be removed. ¹: not the best metric in the world, that's true, but we don't have a better one. -- Antonio Terceiro <terce...@debian.org>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
