On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 16:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for "cccc" ... > and guess what ? no more open bug reports
I already did that when I wrote it, actually there still is an open bug for it. So I guess you didn't actually go trough these proposed steps yourself. Anyway, it is completely besides the point, because you or anyone else won't check a week or a month from now if there's bug filed against cccc, that is what maintenance is about. > > I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding > > issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or > > not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed. > > this is the same argument as already made and rejected ... Where was this rejected and by whom ? By you I guess ? That just doesn't cut it, errors made in the past are no reason to make them again in the future. > feel free to mask > and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer So now we do have your blessing ? cccc is then up for removal as of this moment. - foser
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
