On 12.11.19 00:00, Sam Hartman wrote:
"Moritz" == Moritz Mühlenhoff <[email protected]> writes:Moritz> Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> schrieb: >> One maintainer doesn't get to block the removal of an entire >> stack like Qt4. I think there's a reasonable point of discussion >> about when RoQA is appropriate, but there comes a time when stuff >> just has to go. That doesn't make it a free for all, but for >> old, unsupported libs we should have a bias towards action. Moritz> We should even work towards automating this further; if a Moritz> package is RC-buggy for longer than say a year (with some Moritz> select exceptions) it should just get auto-removed from the Moritz> archive. if you do this, please standardize a way for a maintainer to flag that they don't want a version package in testing. I had a package that was "RC buggy" for a couple of years because I didn't have confidence in the stability of the over the wire protocol. Similarly I've had RC buggy packages because I wasn't confident in my ability to provide support across a stable release.
why do you even consider such uploads suitable for unstable? That's something which should go to experimental. And I would like to see some automatic demotion from unstable to experimental for packages with RC issues which are not fixed for some time.
Matthias
