Hello, On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 09:30:22PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote: > Le mercredi 05 octobre 2011 à 16:08 +0200, Matthias Klose a écrit : > > > > During the oneiric development cycle we had syncs of library packages > > from > > experimental, introducing new sonames, and changing APIs in a way that > > other > […] > While I agree that people who start a transition should have some > responsibilities in it I also think that we should be ok with dropping > unmaintained code which is not ported at the end of the cycle (and not > especially require that whoever started the transition has to be the one > that should fix the universe).
Not ported is not the same as not maintained. It's very easy to be blinkered and assume that Ubuntu is the same as the main component, but that would be doing a disservice to our users. You might not ever hear about it, but every time something is removed you are potentially letting people down. http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/the_popcon_problem/ I think we owe it to our users to assess the impact of transitions on the entire archive and expend a reasonable amount of effort to not further break things. Saying “I have broken your software with my new library and if you want it in Ubuntu then you must port to the new API in a small number of weeks” is very disappointing. Regards, -- Iain Lane [ i...@orangesquash.org.uk ] Debian Developer [ la...@debian.org ] Ubuntu Developer [ la...@ubuntu.com ] PhD student [ i...@cs.nott.ac.uk ]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
