FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-15-2008, 03:35 PM
Thomas Bushnell BSG
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 10:34 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:10:26AM +0000, 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 only post remove requests after people have had a goodly
> > chance to take over maintenance themselves.
>
> Please, gnome 1.x is discontinued for years now, and the number of
> packages that depends upon gnome-libs is fairly limited now, it's a
> bearable task. FWIW the current list of package is:

This is what people said before, and gnucash nearly vanished from Debian
because the gnome team hadn't bothered to alert me or arrange an orderly
transition.

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.

> Most of those package either have far better alternatives (gabber,
> gtoaster, …), are libs (lib*, gnomemm, …) or will probably easily drop
> the dependency (xemacs21, nethack, …). Most of the upstreams of those
> applications are dead, and the applications don't budge, and there is
> little point in having them in lenny when you can use the version in
> etch on your lenny without a problem.

Most? Really? Wow, I'm impressed. Are you sure? People said this the
last time around, and they forgot gnucash. How about we let these
maintainers make that determination rather than you making it for them?

Thomas
 
Old 01-15-2008, 03:56 PM
Pierre Habouzit
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:35:54PM +0000, 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 +0000, 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 only post remove requests after people have had a goodly
> > > chance to take over maintenance themselves.
> >
> > Please, gnome 1.x is discontinued for years now, and the number of
> > packages that depends upon gnome-libs is fairly limited now, it's a
> > bearable task. FWIW the current list of package is:
>
> This is what people said before, and gnucash nearly vanished from Debian
> because the gnome team hadn't bothered to alert me or arrange an orderly
> transition.
>
> 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.

Now explain me why _you_ who aren't concerned by the transition are from
far the most vocal about it ?

> > Most of those package either have far better alternatives (gabber,
> > gtoaster, …), are libs (lib*, gnomemm, …) or will probably easily drop
> > the dependency (xemacs21, nethack, …). Most of the upstreams of those
> > applications are dead, and the applications don't budge, and there is
> > little point in having them in lenny when you can use the version in
> > etch on your lenny without a problem.
>
> Most? Really? Wow, I'm impressed. Are you sure? People said this the
> last time around, and they forgot gnucash. How about we let these
> maintainers make that determination rather than you making it for them?

I opened bugs on the packages so that people can discuss it, and I'll
monitor them closely I said it. The fact that you don't seem to trust my
word that it's exactly what I'll do is insulting.

And again please stop Cc-ing debian-release.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O madcoder@debian.org
OOO http://www.madism.org
 
Old 01-15-2008, 04:02 PM
Neil McGovern
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

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
> maintenance.
>

gnome-libs has now been orphaned for more than a year. I would have
expected it to have been picked up by now.

> Most? Really? Wow, I'm impressed. Are you sure? People said this the
> last time around, and they forgot gnucash. How about we let these
> maintainers make that determination rather than you making it for them?
>

Do you know of any specific examples that would cause a problem?

Neil
--
<moray> hm, maybe wearing a black t-shirt while dusting my bedroom for the
first time in years wasn't such a good idea
 
Old 01-15-2008, 04:59 PM
Thomas Bushnell BSG
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

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.
>
> Now explain me why _you_ who aren't concerned by the transition are from
> far the most vocal about it ?

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?

> I opened bugs on the packages so that people can discuss it, and I'll
> monitor them closely I said it. The fact that you don't seem to trust my
> word that it's exactly what I'll do is insulting.

I didn't say I didn't trust your word.




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-15-2008, 05:01 PM
Thomas Bushnell BSG
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 13:39 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <cobaco@skolelinux.no> 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.
>
> GNOME 1.x is neither maintained in Debian nor upstream. Noone has
> stepped forward to keep it alive. The main reason that it's still in
> Debian is that we don't clean up often enough.

This is what was said the last time. But nobody asked the maintainers
of gnome 1.x packages whether they would maintain it; the team just
decreed that nobody would step forward, and started deleting packages.
It caused a major headache. I'm asking for a more orderly process this
time. 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."

Thomas



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-15-2008, 05:03 PM
Thomas Bushnell BSG
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:02 +0000, 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 it. Of course, it will also be up to them to do the
> > maintenance.
> >
>
> gnome-libs has now been orphaned for more than a year. I would have
> expected it to have been picked up by now.

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.

> > Most? Really? Wow, I'm impressed. Are you sure? People said this the
> > last time around, and they forgot gnucash. How about we let these
> > maintainers make that determination rather than you making it for them?
> >
> Do you know of any specific examples that would cause a problem?

No; I haven't investigated it. That's why I am asking to let those
maintainers decide. Thinking up yet one more way to make the decision
without involving them seems like a poor strategy. There is no need for
me to figure out whether there is a specific example or not. Instead,
just tell the maintainers, and give them the option.

Thomas
-


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-15-2008, 05:56 PM
Luk Claes
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 13:39 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <cobaco@skolelinux.no> 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.
>> GNOME 1.x is neither maintained in Debian nor upstream. Noone has
>> stepped forward to keep it alive. The main reason that it's still in
>> Debian is that we don't clean up often enough.
>
> This is what was said the last time. But nobody asked the maintainers
> of gnome 1.x packages whether they would maintain it; the team just
> decreed that nobody would step forward, and started deleting packages.
> It caused a major headache. I'm asking for a more orderly process this
> time. 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."

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...

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-15-2008, 06:47 PM
Russ Allbery
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> 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 (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-15-2008, 07:42 PM
Ben Finney
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> 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 of the package maintainer to run 'wnpp-alert' to be
aware if the packages they depend on need help.

It was retitled as ITA on 2007-08-19, and not altered since then. That
means it won't show up in 'wnpp-alert', which is unfortunate since
it's been rather a long time.

--
"I know when I'm going to die, because my birth certificate has |
` an expiration date." -- Steven Wright |
_o__) |
Ben Finney


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-15-2008, 08:22 PM
Thomas Bushnell BSG
 
Default gnome 1.x removal

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 I suggested.

Thomas



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:17 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org