Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The upstream developers are converting to gnome-2 as soon as they can, >> but they aren't ready yet. > > These packages are being abandoned because no one is willing to maintain > them.
Abandoning is fine. I did not say "continue to maintain them". I said "don't request deletion of packages still in use." What I said was: "Orphan packages that you don't want to maintain, and I'm happy to maintain what actually needs a non-orphaned maintainer." By "actually needs" I mean what has bugs and needs more attention than QA can provide. And, btw, I do QA too. I do wish people would *orphan packages they don't want to maintain.* > Please have a look at #289789 and #289790, then. #289789 is an RFA for imlib. imlib is not buggy (at least, it doesn't have bugs filed against it. Also, imlib is not actually depended on by anything, which makes it a different case. > You should also > consider giving a hand with some GNOME 1 packages that aren't really > maintained anymore, like gnome-libs, gconf, bonobo, etc. It sounds as if the main gnome maintainers do not want to maintain these. That's fine. The correct thing to do is to file RFAs, and then O them, as I said. I'm a member of the QA team, and I maintain a package which still needs gnome-1 libraries. Other than the occasional security issue, the gnome-1 packages do not seem to be so bug-ridden that QA maintainance is inappropriate. However, if having a name on them is so very important in a particular case, I can deal. The point here is that the proper thing to do with a package you don't want to maintain, but which other Debian packages need, is to *orphan it*. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
