Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-12 Thread Svante Signell
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 21:28 +0200, Torsten Werner wrote: > Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Svante Signell: > > libpcap0.8: #612834 > > A new version that includes the patch has been uploaded and that means > that the old version will be automatically removed from unstable. Thanks. Another packag

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-12 Thread Svante Signell
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 21:28 +0200, Torsten Werner wrote: > Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Svante Signell: > > libpcap0.8: #612834 > > A new version that includes the patch has been uploaded and that means > that the old version will be automatically removed from unstable. Thanks. Another packag

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-11 Thread Luca Capello
Hi there! On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 19:54:33 +0200, Torsten Werner wrote: > Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Mehdi Dogguy: >> can't this limit to 2009 be pushed further? what would be the difference >> if we consider 2010, or 2011? (Just want to see the impact). > > 800 packages would be affected if the

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-11 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Torsten Werner , 2011-04-11, 21:03: 3. These packages are non-free, non-auto-buildable, and have no RC bug filed: amiwm dgen libapache-mod-fastcgi lmbench nttcp q-tools sgb teamspeak-server I was aware of some of them but thanks for the update. If we remove old binaries, they'll migrate t

Re: Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-11 Thread Torsten Werner
Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Jakub Wilk: > 1. These packages were uploaded recently: > > altree guile-cairo nyquist > > How about giving maintainers/autobuilders a little more time? > > 2. libmowgli is in the middle of a transition, and there are still some > reverse dependencies of its old v

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-11 Thread Torsten Werner
Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Mark Hymers: > Torsten, do you think we should add this to the cruft-report output? > Maybe using a two year cut off or something (entirely arbitrary) so that > they'd be listed at http://ftp-master.debian.org/cruft-report-daily.txt ? Why not. It would be a good exe

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Torsten Werner , 2011-04-10, 18:45: http://ftp-master.debian.org/users/twerner/pre-lenny.txt 1. These packages were uploaded recently: altree guile-cairo nyquist How about giving maintainers/autobuilders a little more time? 2. libmowgli is in the middle of a transition, and there are still

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Torsten Werner
Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Steve Langasek: > Only that I had a hard time understanding what you were talking about > removing. :-) Okay, let me rephrase it: i'll keep the newest version of each source package and all older versions that have been uploaded after 2008. Torsten -- To UNSUBSC

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Torsten Werner
Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Svante Signell: > libpcap0.8: #612834 A new version that includes the patch has been uploaded and that means that the old version will be automatically removed from unstable. Torsten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subjec

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Mark Hymers
On Sun, 10, Apr, 2011 at 11:50:45AM -0700, Steve Langasek spoke thus.. > I agree, dropping binaries from old source versions so that we can prune the > sources is a good idea. Yeah, that confused me a bit too! Torsten, do you think we should add this to the cruft-report output? Maybe using a two

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 06:45:54PM +0200, Torsten Werner wrote: > I plan to remove very old source packages from unstable. The actual > algorithm will be: > from all source packages that have more than 1 versions in unstable: > remove all of them that have version < newest_version and that have b

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Torsten Werner
Am -10.01.-28163 20:59, schrieb Mehdi Dogguy: > can't this limit to 2009 be pushed further? what would be the difference > if we consider 2010, or 2011? (Just want to see the impact). 800 packages would be affected if the date limit would be set to < 2011. I have generated a full list at

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Svante Signell
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 19:14 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Torsten Werner, le Sun 10 Apr 2011 18:45:54 +0200, a écrit : > > from all source packages that have more than 1 versions in unstable: > > remove all of them that have version < newest_version and that have been > > uploaded before 2009. >

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Mehdi Dogguy
On 04/10/2011 06:45 PM, Torsten Werner wrote: I plan to remove very old source packages from unstable. The actual algorithm will be: from all source packages that have more than 1 versions in unstable: remove all of them that have version< newest_version and that have been uploaded before 2009

Re: plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Samuel Thibault
Torsten Werner, le Sun 10 Apr 2011 18:45:54 +0200, a écrit : > from all source packages that have more than 1 versions in unstable: > remove all of them that have version < newest_version and that have been > uploaded before 2009. > > A full list is available from >

plan to clean up unstable

2011-04-10 Thread Torsten Werner
Hi, I plan to remove very old source packages from unstable. The actual algorithm will be: from all source packages that have more than 1 versions in unstable: remove all of them that have version < newest_version and that have been uploaded before 2009. A full list is available from