On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 02:32:50PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 10:24 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 04:59:03PM +0000, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > I completely agree that libdb4.3 is ancient grot, and it should be > > > removed from the archive.
> > > I am distressed that the maintainers decided to wait until the freeze to > > > do that. This is entirely *backwards*. The time to decide, "hey, this > > > library should be removed" is at the *beginning* of the release cycle, > > > not at the end. > > FWIW bugs were filed way before the start of the freeze. We're only > > discussing several months old bugs afaict. So it seems that your rant is > > off. Also debian-release is not a discussion list, and such a post > > should be on -devel. TIA. > Actually, no, you're wrong. The bug was filed against mmorph on > September 29. Please pay attention. It would be easier to "pay attention" if your message had given any indication this was the package you were referring to. As far as I could tell, this was a continuation of the reprepro discussion in the new thread. The bug on mmorph was not filed by the db maintainers, it was filed by a release manager. I guess mmorph was overlooked when the db maintainers filed bugs requesting migration to db4.6 a year ago. That's unfortunate, but it's not a reason to keep db4.3 around in lenny when we can easily dispense with it. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
