Hey Andreas, > The fact is, that we don't like to have unmaintained packages in the archive, > kdvi in this case is one of them. It was re-introduced in intrepid solely to > fill the gap for some features missing in okular. (If some people starts > maintaining it and releases new versions, it can of course be packaged again).
There is an interesting protocol here, you remove any package which is no longer maintained upstream? Do you have a page where you keep the relevant rules about these things? I would like to read up on it. I wouldn't think that removing unmaintained packages just because they no longer have an upstream maintainer to be a bad idea, limiting and too destructive of user choice. More usefully would be to assess the bit-rot, number of bugs, any critical or security issues which makes it dangerous. This package here looks like it works in jaunty, baring any security issues I see no reason why it should be removed. (although I'm sure these things are assesed in due process) The other option is to move these things to an "unmaintained" repository where users can have the initiative to install things they want but also be made aware of it's unmaintained nature (perhaps even encouraging developers to maintain it). At least then people wouldn't have to go digging around for PPAs. MOTO: What has been made, is available; what is yet to be done, costs to do. Although what to do about packages such as the recent Eclipse packages, which are maintained upstream, but not in our packaging. Best Regards, Martin Owens -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
