I know that - I was making an argument that removing Embperl from Debian completely will just hasten the impression that it's a dead project. I would really like it if it could remain in because if it gives Embperl just a bit more visibility and awareness in the community, then that would be a Good Thing (in my book). Sidelining projects and removing them from distros usually just hastens their demise, and I think this is a very good tool to have in the world, so I'd like it to be supported by the distribution that I use, even if I don't currently use the Debian package directly myself right now.
If the decision has already been made and you just want to ditch it then by all means go ahead, but you asked for opinions so I gave mine. Thanks for your time and effort, Neil Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > If you're building Apache from source, you'll also be building > Embperl from source too - in which case, the plans Debian has > to remove the packages will not have any direct affect on you. > > Cheers, > Dominic. > > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:13:09PM -0700, Neil Gunton wrote: >> Thanks, I am aware of the end of support for Wheezy. To be honest I have >> been resisting upgrading because a) it tends to be very disruptive to a >> production server for a live website that is used by lots of people (I >> can't recall one major in-place upgrade that ever went smoothly, so >> usually a complete re-install is needed), and b) I have been unnerved by >> some of the debate I have seen about the move to systemd. I don't know >> much about it myself, but I have heard from people who do seem to know >> about it that it was quite controversial, to say the least. I don't like >> monolithic systems that pull everything else in, and it seems like that >> is the direction systemd is going in. I've been thinking about moving >> over to Devuan, but I haven't checked on the status of that project in a >> while. To be honest I have more pressing things to be worrying about >> usually, and since Wheezy is very stable, it's been low on the list of >> priorities to upgrade. If it works... also, I get the thing about >> security upgrades, but I do have my box pretty well locked down in terms >> of firewall rules, I disable most services that I don't use and I build >> my own Apache from latest source, and MySQL is hidden behind the >> firewall. I know stuff could come up with sendmail or bind, but you do >> your best to keep up. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Neil >> >> Dominic Hargreaves wrote: >>> Well, your Debian Wheezy box will probably continue to run just fine with >>> Embperl :) >>> >>> Seriously though, you should be aware that that release is nearly out >>> of long-term support, and you should be planning an upgrade to Stretch >>> - an excellent opportunity to reap the benefits of our continued attempts >>> to keep things working and not be running a release without security >>> support. >>> >>> As you say, it would be good to hear if there are any plans from anyone >>> who can actively pursue maintenance of Embperl (which implies keeping it >>> working on new perls) who has a stake in it - as there is, I think, >>> noone from the Debian side in this position. >>> >>> Thanks for the feedback - it is appreciated. >>> >>> Best, >>> Dominic. >>> >>> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Neil Gunton wrote: >>>> I am still actively using Embperl on my websites, fwiw. My main site is >>>> the largest collection of bicycle tour journals in the world. I may not >>>> show up in your statistics, but I just wanted to add one voice to the >>>> "please keep it" side. I really like Embperl, it just works and has done >>>> so for the last 18 years for me. I use Debian Wheezy currently, and my >>>> systems don't tend to change much or very often. It's true that Embperl >>>> isn't as actively developed as it used to be, but as with many things >>>> Perl, it is still used by some people in systems that have been around >>>> for a good long while, because they just do the job they are intended to >>>> do and work well, so there's no need for constant churn. I would hope >>>> that Gerald Richter and/or others would at least keep the package up to >>>> date so it can continue to be included in Debian, because being taken >>>> out completely seems like another step toward complete abandonment. If >>>> it's not too much trouble to keep it in, I'd ask for that to happen. The >>>> users might not be vocal or active in development of the package (I'm >>>> not), but it is used and has been for a long time. >>>> >>>> My website is called crazyguyonabike, it's that dot com if anyone's >>>> interested. Not facebook by any means, but it's an active journaling >>>> website and like I said the largest in the world for bicycle tour >>>> journals. I'm also actively working on expansions to the site into other >>>> topics, so this is not a dead issue for me. I plan on continuing to use >>>> Embperl on new sites going forward. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your consideration, >>>> >>>> Neil Gunton >>>> >>>> Dominic Hargreaves wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> As you can see from the message below, we are considering removing Embperl >>>>> from Debian because of concerns about not being actively maintained. We >>>>> have had to patch it several times to cope with changes in newer upstream >>>>> versions over the past few years, and we don't think it is really being >>>>> used much in Debian any more. >>>>> >>>>> Interested if anyone has any thoughts on this from the user or upstream >>>>> dev perspective. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Dominic. >>>>> >>>>> ----- Forwarded message from Dominic Hargreaves <d...@earth.li> ----- >>>>> >>>>> Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:08:38 +0200 >>>>> From: Dominic Hargreaves <d...@earth.li> >>>>> To: sub...@bugs.debian.org >>>>> Subject: Bug#899021: libembperl-perl: FTBFS with Perl 5.27, unmaintained >>>>> upstream >>>>> Reply-To: Dominic Hargreaves <d...@earth.li>, 899...@bugs.debian.org >>>>> >>>>> Source: libembperl-perl >>>>> Version: 2.5.0-11 >>>>> Severity: serious >>>>> Justification: unmaintained upstream, and will shortly break in Debian >>>>> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org >>>>> User: debian-p...@lists.debian.org >>>>> Usertags: perl-5.28-transition hh2018 >>>>> >>>>> The upstream version of this package has not worked since 5.18, and we >>>>> have had to apply several fixes in Debian since. The build has now >>>>> broken again with Perl 5.27: >>>>> >>>>> http://perl.debian.net/rebuild-logs/perl-5.27-throwaway/libembperl-perl_2.5.0-11/libembperl-perl_2.5.0-11_amd64-2018-05-18T08:09:28Z.build >>>>> >>>>> The problem in this case might not be that hard to fix, but I have >>>>> been consisdering deprecating/removing this for some time, as there is >>>>> a limit to how long we can be de facto upstream for this type of >>>>> package. >>>>> >>>>> Currently the package has a popcon of inst: 37 / vote: 22 / recent: 1 >>>>> suggesting that it is barely used anywhere. So I suggest that rather than >>>>> spending any more time maintaining it, we remove it from Debian. >>>>> >>>>> CC to debian-perl to get wider exposure of the proposal. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Dominic. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- End forwarded message ----- >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: embperl-unsubscr...@perl.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: embperl-h...@perl.apache.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: embperl-unsubscr...@perl.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: embperl-h...@perl.apache.org
