On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 02:04:14PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: > I disagree about the bug being open. A lack of filed bugs could mean that > no one CARES about the pkg at all. And if we have pkgs which are not being > maintained AND no one cares enough to file a bug about then either they > are: > > 1. extraordinarily stable > 2. dead upstreams > 3. unmaintained > 4. unusued > > in ANY of those cases I'd want to start thinking about nuking the pkg from > fedora.
I would like to have more packages matching case 1 in Fedora! ;-) But I guess as soon as you look at non GUI packages that have a specialized use case, you will find a lot packages that do not need to be updated that often once they are old enough. I use most of my packages, that are extraordinarily stable regularly. Upstream might be dead (or is in at least one case), but as far as they work for me without any problems, I do not see any problem there. If there is no change, there is also a less higher change that something is breaking. Examples of my packages: latex-mk, last change by me was 2007-07-28 and I know people who are using it daily with me being the first contact in case of problems. But there are none. Then next example, fcgi. One change since 2007-08-23 by me (and two by Chris Weyl because of perl changes). Works fine for me every day for at least one service using fastcgi. Maybe there are more, I do not remember which do depend on it, but I know one that definitly does. Then there is unclutter, the tarball is from 1994 and it still does it's job without any problems: hiding the mouse cursor when it's idle. Imho the only real problem from your list is, if a package is unmaintained, because if it is maintained, the maintainer usually uses it, otherwise he would just drop it. If upstream is dead but the maintainer fixes bugs, when they are found, I do not see a problem, either. Regards Till
pgprqFWzcPR35.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
