Hi, On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 03:36:10PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 09:19:24AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > Hi Vagrant Cascadian, ... > > Please see > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=449973 > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=462094 > > seeing a couple unresolved but fairly easy to fix bugs and lintian issues, i > offered a in april of 2008 to co-maintain sdm, but didn't recieved a response.
hmmmm that is problem. Is Jonas Smedegaard MIA? Or some spam filter ate message. (I have been bitten by it too.) ... > other than a few minor fixes and code cleanup in 2005, and some changes made > in > late 2007 to make another upstream release, but that turned out to be more > trouble than it was worth. it is pretty much a dead project. I see. > > Although being old and seeming to be obsoleted, sdm is still in Debian. > > Since sdm uses xdialog only, it is simpler and it may have reason to be > > there. > > although xdialog was removed from unstable/testing a while back, and the > likely > replacements (zenity/kdialog), pull in a lot of other dependencies. I see. http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xdialog.html I see this sdm needs to be removed too since its dependency will not be met. > > But this package upstream looks completely stalled to me. > > pretty much, yes. though some of that is because it hasn't *needed* much > development. This means this package itself was WELL WRITTEN. Thanks. > > If you think as upstream that it is better to be removed from archive as > > upstream or security concern, your comment is appreciated. > > without some GUI dialog implementation, it's nearly useless. so other than > sentimental attachment, i don't see much point for it to remain in debian... Since ldm exists, I see no point either. Thanks for your work. Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
