On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 1:50 PM Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> writes: > > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-calmh-du > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-calmh-luhn > > 2018-02-06 > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-hashicorp-raft-boltdb > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-juju-retry > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-mitchellh-multistep > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-pierrec-xxhash > > 2018-02-06 > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-templexxx-reedsolomon > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-tent-http-link-go > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-ugorji-go-msgpack > > 2018-02-06 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-gopkg-fatih-pool.v2 > > 2018-04-15 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-coreos-ioprogress > > 2018-04-15 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-gopkg-olivere-elastic.v2 > > 2018-04-16 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-github-weaveworks-mesh > > I went through those first packages manually and they all looked like > plausible candidates for removal, and filed ftp-master bugs (or > reassigned a bug where there were already a RFA bug open). > I'll take a break now, and wait for feedback on this approach.
Thank you for taking the time to manually check and request for feedback. > Thoughts? I think it's safe to removal if the FRA already opened for a long time and the package has no reverse-dependencies now. And we can easily upload again if we found it's useful as we keep the old package repo under attic/ path on go-team namespace. > Perhaps [email protected] doesn't need a cc? I'll drop them from future > reports unless someone objects. As we work on migration tasks, eg: forking and packaging newer major versions like -v2, -v3. Having a routine(eg: monthly or quarterly) check to catch unused -dev package would be awesome. Best regards, -- -Andrew
