Okay, it seems that I should have provided many more details.
Quixote is "A simple but powerful Web development framework for Python
programmers". It's very low-level, but at the same time it's
exceedingly sane. When I added quixote to portage it was just going
through its 1.0 release. I'm stil
On Tuesday 01 November 2005 19:49, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> How about "unmaintained and in need of version bumps that no-one is
> going to do"?
Depends on the need. Debian is able to cope with old versions of software
without problems.
If there are no outstanding bugs about the package, a need of
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 12:43:16 -0500 Jon Portnoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| However, going around removing things simply because they're
| unmaintained is no good. Unmaintained and broken is a different story.
How about "unmaintained and in need of version bumps that no-one is
going to do"?
--
C
On Tuesday 01 November 2005 18:43, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> You are technically correct in the sense that there is literally no
> policy stating "keep unmaintained stuff in the repository."
All I wanted to say is that we have no policy about it and a fair share of
rotten ebuilds in the repository ref
1.11.2005, 18:40:35, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 November 2005 18:11, Jakub Moc wrote:
>> OK, lets remove perl.
> Such a reply is not an argument, but pointless. As you know as well, Perl is
> not exactly something other packages do not depend on.
As already stated by Flameeyes, we c
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 06:04:08PM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Monday 31 October 2005 22:44, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > Checked the bugzilla and the two open bugs seem to be version bumps. I
> > think the policy is not to remove working ebuilds from the tree although
> > they are not maintained
On Tuesday 01 November 2005 18:11, Jakub Moc wrote:
> OK, lets remove perl.
Such a reply is not an argument, but pointless. As you know as well, Perl is
not exactly something other packages do not depend on.
Carsten
pgpUegjBwwo3a.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Monday 31 October 2005 22:44, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Checked the bugzilla and the two open bugs seem to be version bumps. I
> think the policy is not to remove working ebuilds from the tree although
> they are not maintained by anyone.
I follow Petteri's statement, I don't think we should remove
1.11.2005, 18:04:08, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Monday 31 October 2005 22:44, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> Checked the bugzilla and the two open bugs seem to be version bumps. I
>> think the policy is not to remove working ebuilds from the tree although
>> they are not maintained by anyone.
> It's not
On Monday 31 October 2005 22:44, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Checked the bugzilla and the two open bugs seem to be version bumps. I
> think the policy is not to remove working ebuilds from the tree although
> they are not maintained by anyone.
It's not policy to keep unmaintained stuff in the repository
Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Although I'm the nominal maintainer of dev-python/quixote, I don't use
> it for anything and I've been having difficulties finding someone to
> take over maintenance. If nobody wants it then I'm going to suggest we
> yank it from the tree and let the people who need it grab
Although I'm the nominal maintainer of dev-python/quixote, I don't use
it for anything and I've been having difficulties finding someone to
take over maintenance. If nobody wants it then I'm going to suggest we
yank it from the tree and let the people who need it grab versions from
bugzilla.
Best
12 matches
Mail list logo
