Hi, Dominic Hargreaves (2020-11-10): > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 09:03:42AM +0100, intrigeri wrote: >> Dominic Hargreaves (2020-11-09): >> > A year on, it seems there's almost no realistic prospect of this >> > package coming back. Shall we remove it from sid? >> >> Thank you for caring! >> >> Quoting the plan I proposed #912860: "I intend to remove libgtk2-perl >> from testing soon after the Buster release, and then from sid later >> during the Bullseye development cycle".
> We're quite a way through the bullseye development cycle already but > I guess you mean once we're into the deep freeze when there is no longer > any chance of reviving those packages for bullseye, which makes sense > to me. Actually, when writing my previous message here, I misread my own initial proposal. You're indeed correct that under this proposal, we could remove libgtk2-perl from sid right away. Thank you for your patience! :) Given the upcoming freeze, I'd like to give the maintainers of the reverse-dependencies a last chance to get their package in Bullseye before migration of new source packages to testing is disabled (2021-02-12), which would be required if we removed libgtk2-perl and all its reverse-dependencies right away. In particular: - tinyca: a few months ago the maintainer was actively working on a solution - gprename: upstream ported to GTK 3, now waiting for the new release to be packaged & uploaded So, I'm now leaning towards removing libgtk2-perl and its remaining reverse-dependencies from sid at any time after 2021-02-12 (I don't care much when exactly). At that point, indeed it'll be too late for these packages to go into Bullseye, and their maintainers will have 2 years to find a solution. Does this make sense to you? Cheers!
