On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 11:36:50AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 06:42:32PM +0200, Adeodato Sim? wrote: > > then do not many orphaned packages (if not most) fit into one of the > > proposed resons and should be removed from testing? > > > > I think many packages could benefite from this in-the-middle approach: > > instead of completely removing them from debian or letting them get > > released with stable, they just stay in unstable and never migrate. > > > > it would not be keeping them "just for the shake of keeping them" > > either. it would be keeping those that may be of some interest for > > some users, but which don't qualify as release quality and are not > > being maintained at all (except for sporadic QA uploads). > > But that would generally mean that due to dependencies, users interested in > these "too hard basket" packages had to run unstable (or sizeable parts > thereof) in order to install them... I guess it depends on your target > audience for such packages...
In most cases, as they wouldn't have been majorly worked on for quite some time, a rebuild in your local environment should be all that's needed to sort them out. Not to mention that if there hasn't been a rebuild in a while, their dependencies will still be those of the older package. - Matt
