On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:53:50PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > As per release goal, gnome 1.x won't be shipped in Lenny. I just started
> > a first round of bugs (severity important for now), with user/usertag
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/gnome-1.x-removal so that people
Quoting Thomas Bushnell BSG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Because the last time you all did this it got all the way to deleting
> the packages and I had to run around and clean that up. I'm asking you
> to give the maintainers a chance. That's all. Is it really that hard
> to do?
Isn't this what is h
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:53:50PM +, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > As per release goal, gnome 1.x won't be shipped in Lenny. I just started
> > a first round of bugs (severity important for now), with user/usertag
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]/gnome-1.x-removal so that people
Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> As per release goal, gnome 1.x won't be shipped in Lenny. I just started
> a first round of bugs (severity important for now), with user/usertag
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/gnome-1.x-removal so that people
> interested in that goal can track our progress.
Two thumbs up, thanks for
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 19:56 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> We can surely keep all old cruft in the archive and never release again
> (or not with these packages anyway), though I don't think that is
> preferred from a quality assurance, security nor release point of view...
Of course, this isn't what
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Instead of saying "we're deleting this, you will all have to adapt",
> say, "we aren't maintaining this anymore; if you want it, you'll
> have to start taking it over."
Isn't that exactly what bug #369130 means? I thought it was the
responsibility
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wouldn't. I don't keep tabs on every package that my packages depend
> on. One of them could be orphaned and I would never know.
Running wnpp-alert weekly out of cron is a good idea for any DD, IMO.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 13:39 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> "As long as there's interest the software will stay alive" is one of the
>>> main tenets of Free Software. Consequently, IMHO, as long as th
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:02 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:35:54AM -0500, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > So please, let these maintainers choose, rather than ordering them
> > about. It is *they* who are in a position to decide whether maintaining
> > gnome 1.x is worth
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 13:39 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "As long as there's interest the software will stay alive" is one of the
> > main tenets of Free Software. Consequently, IMHO, as long as there's people
> > willing to
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:56 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > So please, let these maintainers choose, rather than ordering them
> > about. It is *they* who are in a position to decide whether maintaining
> > gnome 1.x is worth it. Of course, it will also be up to them to do the
> > maintenance.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:35:54AM -0500, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> So please, let these maintainers choose, rather than ordering them
> about. It is *they* who are in a position to decide whether maintaining
> gnome 1.x is worth it. Of course, it will also be up to them to do the
> maintenanc
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:35:54PM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 10:34 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:10:26AM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > > Don't start filing remove requests until other maintainers have a
> > > chance. Take th
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 10:34 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:10:26AM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Don't start filing remove requests until other maintainers have a
> > chance. Take the step of contacting those who maintain packages that
> > depend on the librari
On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "As long as there's interest the software will stay alive" is one of
> > the main tenets of Free Software. Consequently, IMHO, as long as
> > there's people willing to maintain i
"cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "As long as there's interest the software will stay alive" is one of the
> main tenets of Free Software. Consequently, IMHO, as long as there's people
> willing to maintain it, it shouldn't be removed regardless of how old it
> is.
GNO
On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:10:26AM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Don't start filing remove requests until other maintainers have a
> > chance. Take the step of contacting those who maintain packages that
> > depend on the libraries you w
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 09:34:54AM +, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:10:26AM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Don't start filing remove requests until other maintainers have a
> > chance. Take the step of contacting those who maintain packages that
> > depend on the l
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:10:26AM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Don't start filing remove requests until other maintainers have a
> chance. Take the step of contacting those who maintain packages that
> depend on the libraries you want to remove, post RFAs instead of remove
> requests, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/14/08 19:20, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> (Dropping -release, which is not a discussion list, and Pierre, who is
> obviously subscribed to both.)
>
> On 15/01/2008, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> This is not the right process for something like this.
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 02:20 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> (Dropping -release, which is not a discussion list, and Pierre, who is
> obviously subscribed to both.)
>
> On 15/01/2008, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > This is not the right process for something like this. Instead, I
> > believe you s
(Dropping -release, which is not a discussion list, and Pierre, who is
obviously subscribed to both.)
On 15/01/2008, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> This is not the right process for something like this. Instead, I
> believe you should find out specifically which packages depend on
> gnome 1.x, and o
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 00:07 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Then I'll do some more runs of the same principle on other gnome 1.x
> related libs until we got rid of them al.
>
> If you know your package depends on gnome 1.x one way or the other, now
> is the time to fix that, package a new upstrea
23 matches
Mail list logo
