On Sat, 27 Aug 2016 11:40:03 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 26-08-16 23:40, Julien Cristau wrote: > > off the top of my head: > > - it's wasting time of anyone doing QA work > > - it's wasting time of any user who looks for a piece of software to > > do > > $stuff and gets to eliminate all the noise from unmaintained > > probably-broken cruft > These were indeed the two items I was mostly thinking of. I felt the > pain of the first item last year with the dh-python migration at > Debconf.
Speaking about [perl, in my case] transitions, in my experience orphaned packages are less annyoing (I can just do a QA upload, where I can fix whatever I want) than officially-maintained-but-de-facto-neglected packages where I do minimal NMUs, and then again next year, and then again the year afterwards, etc. (I know, the answer to that is salvaging^Winvolving MIA and getting the packages orphaned; I just wanted to point out that orphaned packages are not that much of a burden in all cases.) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - https://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Beatles
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature
