Le Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 02:31:22AM -0700, Mike Bird a écrit : > > (2) To a user who wishes to use a working feature of an imperfect > package, Debian is better with the imperfect package than > without: MISSING PACKAGE < IMPERFECT PACKAGE < PERFECT PACKAGE. > This is true even if the imperfect package has an avoidable > publicized security bug.
I doubt that in such a simple equation you can grasp the differences of imperfectness that lead to removal or not. I think that Debian should not lure its users to use packages for which there is no maintainer who is willing or able to sustain a high quality across releases. In that sense, it is much better to remove a package with a fixable bug if there is obviously nobody behind to fix the next. I trust our release team to do the removals in the intersts of our users. Actually, packages that are removed from testing and do not improve or justify their situation should probably better be removed from unstable as well. Our packages are free software, so imperfect ones removed from the archive can be redistributed in third-party apt repository if there is a niche for this. This way, the decisions of removal can be proven wrong by user-driven facts. Have a nice day, -- Charles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
