Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:18:13PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: >> Yes. Deleting information is a big step. > > Luckily we aren't doing that, since the information itself is still > available in archives.
Whose archives? Ours? Perhaps if you would look at what you snipped, where I said: By contrast, if a package is deleted that shouldn't be deleted, it costs a lot of work to reverse, and becomes harder and harder to reverse the more time has gone by. The point is that if you delete information, *as time goes by* it gets harder and harder to reverse. Fewer archives have it, it starts to slide into oblivion. >>I was myself bit by this, when the gnome maintainers decided that >>gnome-1 was obsolete, and started deleting things, despite there being >>packages (such as gnucash) which depended on the libraries in question. > > Luckily this is also not at issue, since dependencies are being looked > at. Yes, but the OP *didn't say that*. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
