>> Thanks for the clarification. Automatic removal might be a bit >> aggressive but a warning would be very helpful I guess. > > From the user’s perspective, if they already installed a package that later > becomes unavailable, they’d see a warning when they do “refresh”, but > otherwise they could continue using the installed package. > > But within the package source, what reason is there to keep old packages > listed if their git URL no longer points to a valid package? What would a > user do with that information? Theoretically, if the package was just > temporarily unavailable, the next time the aggregation process runs, it would > get listed again and users can seamlessly start receiving updates for it > again.
I wasn't precise, sorry. I thought of an temporary unavailable package repository and had in mind that it would be deleted from the upstream package source repository by a cron job. I guess you are talking about a local copy of that source repo. In that case deleting unavailable packages wouldn't harm. I thought about supporting the operator of the upstream source repository in cleaning the repo. However, this will require manual interaction anyway and hopefully isn't a use case that will be encountered soon :) Best regards, Jan _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
