On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò <flamee...@flameeyes.eu> wrote: > On 01/02/2013 23:52, Rich Freeman wrote: >> >> For those who are doing the treecleaning, please do yourself a favor >> and point out the actual show-stoppers so that you don't have a war on >> your hand every time you mask something. :) > > Or maybe, you know, stop starting idiotic flamewars on principles > assuming that all of QA is out to ruin your life, which seems to happen > pretty often to you.
The argument was made that unmaintained packages that have dead upstreams should be removed. I explained why this was bad policy. This is not a flamewar. It turns out that this wasn't actually why these packages were removed, but it doesn't really change the validity of anything I said. In the end the error wasn't in the removal of the packages, but in the justification for doing so. It really isn't meant personally, and I certainly don't take it as such. Rich
