On 2024-09-19 02:07, Andrej Shadura wrote: > Hi all, > > On Wed, 18 Sep 2024, at 21:57, Michael Fladischer wrote: > Am 18.09.2024 um 15:43 schrieb Nilesh Patra: >>> Please remove the dep on mermaid. >> >> this will cause lintian warnings about the mermaid library loaded from a >> CDN. As I have settled with uvicorn as my preferred ASGI server a while >> ago, I would remove myself from uploaders. See if someone still deems it >> worth to either fix the documentation build without mermaid or just drop >> the python-hypercorn-doc package. >> >> Otherwise I would just RM the package because of its low popcon. > > Please no RMs. I’m using hypercorn myself. I’ll fix it. > However, I’m still not sure why mermaid was removed in the first place, it’s > quite useful to have it in Debian.
Hmm. How exactly? Generally one would want to package JS libs for end-user applications. Thus far only one package uses it that too just for its documentation binary package. mermaid is also lying in a bad state for 2+ years with little to no maintenance. It's also not straightforward to maintain this (complicated with multiple deps) package, keep up with new versions and also fixup CVEs as they come. Given that it has low popcon, only 1 reverse-dep (in ~5 years) that too only for documentation and high cost of maintenance, I am not really sure as to why this would be useful. If you feel like, you are extremely welcome to take over the maintenance of mermaid, close all the RC bugs with a new upload/release and also close the RM bug provided you realistically have the time/cycles. Otherwise I suggest to release hypercorn with mermaid removed as a dep. If you have any thoughts/opinions, please let me know. Have a nice day! :) Thank you Nilesh
