Re: Source packages apparantly without any users (popcon)

2005-08-05 Thread Nathanael Nerode
php-clamav (not filed RC bug, not in testing nor stable) Uninstallable. Mainainter needs a wake-up call. pcrd (1 bug, same version in oldstable as in unstable) 124-day-old copyright file problem. Maintainer needs a poke. ninpaths (1 bug) Might be OK to leave this. (non-free) mush (

Re: Source packages apparantly without any users (popcon)

2005-08-05 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Note that the RC bugs are integrated in total bug count: I'm going to ignore the ones with no bugs for now. Roxen seems to deserve some analysis of its own. Perhaps it could be strongly suggested to Turbo that he drop the entire constellation of roxen3 packages (roxen3, libroxen-*)? xmms-

Re: Source packages apparantly without any users (popcon)

2005-08-05 Thread Russ Allbery
Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > postit (orphaned, 0 bugs) I have no idea why anyone would use this instead of newsx or suck. Maybe because it's simpler, I suppose, but no one seems to be eagerly using it. It can probably go. It really only deals with half of the problem that most privat

Source packages apparantly without any users (popcon)

2005-08-05 Thread Luk Claes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi The following packages have 0 or 1 user according to popcon (at Debconf time). Maybe some of them can be removed? I was so free to exclude clear cases of: * l10n packages * new packages Note that the RC bugs are integrated in total bug count:

Orphan oops

2005-08-05 Thread Moritz Muehlenhoff
Hi, oops in sid hasn't received the sid fix for DSA-726 for three months now, and another security report hasn't received a reply for three weeks. There are 1.5 years old RC portability bugs as well, last maintainer upload was 14 months ago. So oops should really be orphaned. Given the fact that it

Re: Maintainer inactivity on am-utils package: Request to adopt

2005-08-05 Thread Jeroen van Wolffelaar
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 10:10:23PM +1000, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote: > On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:51:00PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > > >I pinged him again, if he doesn't manage to update the package in a > >week or so, please go ahead. > > BTW, please request the removal of amd.

Re: Maintainer inactivity on am-utils package: Request to adopt

2005-08-05 Thread Anibal Monsalve Salazar
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 01:51:00PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > >I pinged him again, if he doesn't manage to update the package in a >week or so, please go ahead. BTW, please request the removal of amd. http://packages.debian.org/unstable/net/amd reads: Package: amd (1:0.3) Dummy pa

Re: Maintainer inactivity on am-utils package: Request to adopt

2005-08-05 Thread Jeroen van Wolffelaar
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 12:18:20PM +0100, Tim Cutts wrote: > > On 13 Apr 2005, at 18:49, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > >On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 03:33:06PM +0100, Tim Cutts wrote: > > > >>I am hereby formally offering to adopt it.[am-utils] > >> > >>I imagine the QA team will want to nudge Phi

Re: Maintainer inactivity on am-utils package: Request to adopt

2005-08-05 Thread Tim Cutts
On 13 Apr 2005, at 18:49, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 03:33:06PM +0100, Tim Cutts wrote: I am hereby formally offering to adopt it.[am-utils] I imagine the QA team will want to nudge Philippe first, though... Nudged. Another four months have passed and there's