On 4 October 2010 04:32, Jakob Gruber <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/03/2010 08:57 PM, Xyne wrote: >> >> I've cast a "yes" vote. I also move to name this "Operation Oliver Twist" >> and to >> name the orphaning script "twister". >> >> One problem that might arise though is if a stable package (i.e. one that >> almost never gets updated upstream) has been recently flagged out-of-date >> then >> it might get orphaned (a malicious user who is aware of the impending >> operation might even write a script to flag such packages out-of-date). >> Perhaps >> you could cross-reference the last activity of the maintainer when >> deciding >> whether to delete a package, e.g. last package action<= 2009-01-01 and >> last >> maintainer action<= xxxx-xx-xx. >> >> That shouldn't add much complexity to the code but it might improve the >> handling of a few fringe cases. I'm really just floating the idea though. >> >> Regards, >> Xyne > > Sounds good. > After adding the 'last maintainer action <= 2009-01-01' criteria, the list > still contains 335 packages. > Keep in mind this list is generated from a DB dump (which is roughly 2 > weeks old) so it might not be 100% up to date. > > http://pastebin.com/e5qJxBUs
OK, this is _much_ better and can be mass-orphaned. Good job, voted now.
