Your message dated Fri, 13 Jan 2017 13:01:22 +0000
with message-id <>
and subject line Bug#850838: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #850838,
regarding RM: ampache -- RoQA; orphaned, needs periodic rebuilds, 2 years 
behind upstream, RC #801116
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact

Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: David Prévot <>, Andreas Beckmann 

ampache was accidentally allowed back into testing when the BTS
temporarily forgot about RC bugs. I was about to ask for it to be
removed from testing again, but actually, I think removal from unstable
would be a better resolution. It can still get back into the archive if
someone maintains it (orphaned snce 2014, #766449).

ampache generates lockstep dependencies on some of the libraries it uses,
and needs periodic rebuilds (which have to be sourceful because it is
Architecture: all) to update those lockstep dependencies; if that is
not done, it can block transitions. I assume the intention was for the
maintainer to check for compatibility before re-uploading, but this seems
unlikely to happen in QA uploads.

It does have a popcon of 117 installations, which is more than I'd usually
like for a removal request; but the Debian package is 2.5 years behind
upstream and has nobody maintaining it, so having it packaged doesn't seem
like a net positive for Debian users.

In October 2015, David Prévot cloned a RC bug titled "Unsuitable for
stable without proper maintenance" which has not had any response
since. An extract from that bug:

David Prévot wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 01:08:53PM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> > I don't mind doing rebuild-only QA uploads (since arch:all cannot be
> > binNMUed), but I don't care about (or even use) ampache at all.
> Then please don’t: keeping an outdated and unmaintained version of some
> PHP scripts without anyone caring if it actually works or is secure is
> not a service to our users.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We believe that the bug you reported is now fixed; the following
package(s) have been removed from unstable:

   ampache | 3.6-rzb2752+dfsg-9 | source, all
ampache-common | 3.6-rzb2752+dfsg-9 | all

------------------- Reason -------------------
RoQA; orphaned, needs periodic rebuilds, 2 years behind upstream, RC #801116

Note that the package(s) have simply been removed from the tag
database and may (or may not) still be in the pool; this is not a bug.
The package(s) will be physically removed automatically when no suite
references them (and in the case of source, when no binary references
it).  Please also remember that the changes have been done on the
master archive and will not propagate to any mirrors until the next
dinstall run at the earliest.

Packages are usually not removed from testing by hand. Testing tracks
unstable and will automatically remove packages which were removed
from unstable when removing them from testing causes no dependency
problems. The release team can force a removal from testing if it is
really needed, please contact them if this should be the case.

We try to close bugs which have been reported against this package
automatically. But please check all old bugs, if they were closed
correctly or should have been re-assigned to another package.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to

The full log for this bug can be viewed at

This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing

Debian distribution maintenance software
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to