Hi there.

I know it'll complicate things but I need to say — Richard Wilbur, the
Bazaar maintainer, actually responded in July.  He even expressed
willingness to continue development of Bazaar.  I am attaching his
email, it should explain a lot.

I didn't respond to him because he asked sth about Launchpad and I am
not someone aware of how it was used.  I believe this was one of the
issues that I requested Amin to handle when I connected with him on
Jitsi Meet in September.

Nonetheless, it would have been better if I had just written to Wilbur
that we can't help him with Launchpad.  Now, the issue has been stalled
for 5 months which is embarrassing (although somewhat fair since it took
Wilbur just as much time to reply to Amin in the first place).

I don't know how much development Wilbur exactly foresees and how
strong his preference for using bzr for version control is.  This might
be something to discuss with him.  Since it's a tool he himself
develops, perhaps we could suggest that he also self-hosts it (to avoid
putting burned on Savannah admins)?

Best!
Wojtek

--
W. Kosior

website: https://koszko.org/koszko.html
fediverse: https://friendica.me/profile/koszko/profile
PGP fingerprint: E972 7060 E3C5 637C 8A4F  4B42 4BC5 221C 5A79 FD1A


On Tue, 03 Dec 2024 11:47:47 -0500
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <a...@gnu.org> wrote:

>    >>>> Hello,
>    >>>> Please drop Bazaar. It's been 8 years since the last release. I
>    >>>> doubt
>    >>>> if it's worth anyone's time to maintain it anymore.  
>    >>> Thank you for your email.
>    >>> We don't simply 'drop' GNU packages.  I have, however, emailed the
>    >>> GNU maintainer of Bazaar to inquire about the current development and
>    >>> maintenance status of the project and going into the future.
>    >>> Thanks,
>    >>> -a  
>    >> 
>    >> Ah, I assumed it was orphaned since the GNU package is "hosted" at
>    >> archive.org. There is a fork called "Breezy" or "brz" available for
>    >> debian etc, so I assumed it was the best for GNU to drop it (to save
>    >> manpower etc.)
>    >> 
>    >> Hacking happy.  
>    > 
>    > Right.  As I understand it, Bazaar used to be developed and maintained
>    > in collaboration with Canonical, as hinted at by the fact that the
>    > project's site and wiki were hosted on canonical.com subdomains.
>    > It would probably be fair to say that the world at large has moved on
>    > to other VCSes, primarily to git, and it would seem that Canonical is
>    > no longer interested in developing/maintaining Bazaar - since they
>    > shut down the server(s) hosting those subdomains - and the community
>    > forked Bazaar into Breezy, as you mentioned.  However, Bazaar still
>    > technically remains an (active) GNU package, so I've emailed its
>    > GNU maintainer to inquire about its status and whether he has any
>    > further plans for its future or, if it would make sense for us to
>    > mark it as 'decommissioned'.  
> 
>    Hi! 10 months passed, did you get any reply from the maintainer on 
>    record for Bazaar?
> 
> GNU Bazaar should be decommissioned, yes.  But lets do it correctly.
> CCing RMS, and GAC (is that even active?).  Can we decommission GNU
> bazaar? It has had no development since 2016, the maintainer is
> unresponsive for over a year.
> 
> Removing Bazaar support from Savannah seems like a slightly different
> topic and unrelated to decommissioning.  If you do not have the
> bandwidth to maintain suppoer for GNU bazaar -- just delete said
> support and if someone complains, well .. they add it back and
> maintain it.
> 
>    As I said...if GNU doesn't decommission it, it's going to be a 
>    maintenance burden one way or another. e.g. on Savannah "technically" 
>    still supports it (only because of its undecommisioned status??), which 
>    makes Savannah hackers life miserable, because both bzr and its web repo 
>    viewer "loggerhead" are a PITA to set up and maintain, which is also one 
>    of the reasons some of Savannah's VMs are running on ancient versions of 
>    Trisquel, which are just maintenance nightmares for obvious reasons.
> 
> 


Attachment: Re: Please update us about your GNU project
Description: Binary data

Attachment: pgp3WM5VdkUTG.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to