Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Fri Jan 9, 2026 at 10:14 AM GMT, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > If GTK+2 is dead upstream for so long, then it'd be a disservice to > > our users to keep shipping it in new releases. > > Can you expand on why?
Because *in general* software that's dead upstream is a hazard; it'll get no upstream maintenance, no bugfixes, no security updates, no updates to use newer versions of *other* libraries (which means it may slow or block transitions), etc. If someone wants to keep it alive, by all means they should do so, but in that case, they should fork it upstream and give it a name (e.g. "GTKlassic"), and *maintain an upstream for it*, independently of any distribution. Debian packaging shouldn't be the defacto home of an otherwise dead project. - Josh Triplett
