On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 13:57, Lars Bahner wrote: > I am not currently using anything on the wnpp-list, but it > seems to me that not all these packages are better off gotten > rid off. > > Does anyone know something about the importance of these > packages? Has/can someone run this against the popularity-contest?
Speaking for myself, I can say that I still have playmidi installed, albeit version 2.3 instead of 2.4 (2.4 drums sound ugly on my wavetable for some reason I can't fathom; not a Debian problem per se, it's in upstream too). AFAIK, nobody uses playmidi anymore. Most sound cards these days don't even *come* with wavetable synthesis, and software synthesis (ie timidity) sounds so much better than FM synthesis. The only reason I have playmidi installed is that I have a very nice wavetable synthesis daughter board, and playmidi is the only thing I've found that can use it. I'm no "professional MIDI musician", but I suspect that most who are use something other than playmidi. I wouldn't miss it, and I don't think most others will either. As for some of the others, I was thinking about picking up gtick, but I'm not a Debian developer, and it is rumored to be abandoned upstream. I didn't even know about freebirth until someone mentioned that it could probably replace gtick, but it looks like freebirth is orphaned too! There are a couple of others in there that make me wonder: if they go what are some (good) alternatives? For instance, what are some good replacements for magicfilter? Or linuxconf? > My point is that I could prolly adopt a package or two, but have > no knowledge or particular interest in what is being offered. > > On the other hand we should probably take care of the packages > we have before we take on new ones, I suppose. > > I would suspect packages like: > exim-tls > udhcpd > defoma(!) > mserver > scanmail > mnogosearch > cadaver > phpgroupware > pppoeconf > pptp-linux > > to be of some importance. I feel obliged to take responsibility for > at least one of them, but - as I said - I use none of them (except > for defoma of course). > > So, do we have some way of separating that which we really want > to get rid off from that which unfortuneately has been orphaned? > > More over I wish to revive the inflammable discussion as to > whether or not it would be a good idea to have a section in > the archives for unmaintained, much like non-US or non-free. > > I really think it is the best thing for our users if they > can see up front that the package that they are about to install > is not necessarily likely to be bugfixed in the foreseeable > future. Furthermore if they don't have the skills to fix things > themselves, then they just cut of that apt-source. > > Lars. > > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 12:32:33AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Report about packages that need work for Apr 11, 2003 > > > > Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 63 > > Number of packages offered up for adoption this week: 3 > > Total number of orphaned packages: 196 > > Number of packages orphaned this week: 26 > > > -- > Lars Bahner: http://lars.bahner.com/; Voice: +4792884492; Fax: +4792974492 > > > Key fingerprint = A913 7B54 E5FC 804D C12B 18DE 493D 83DE 5DE6 C5D6 > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The more I use other operating systems, the more I like Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org http://www.linux.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
