Okay, it seems that I should have provided many more details. Quixote is "A simple but powerful Web development framework for Python programmers". It's very low-level, but at the same time it's exceedingly sane. When I added quixote to portage it was just going through its 1.0 release. I'm still not entirely comfortable handling webapp-based ebuilds, but quixote itself is not too difficult to maintain by itself. In practice, though, people using quixote are likely to want to any of the following support packages that have sprung up over the last year or two: durus (object database), dulcinea (quixote/dulcinea helper modules), scgi (alternative to fast-cgi), and Sancho (Python unit-testing framework). Many of the packages have ebuilds in bugs, but to date nobody has been willing to maintain them. I'm not that interested in web applications myself, so I'm unwilling to invest the time necessary to make sure that Gentoo has a functional quixote + helpers framework. *Shrug* The result is that Gentoo's support for quixote is horribly inadequate.
My view is that if a package is in the tree, then there's an implicit understanding that we're maintaining it. If we're not, then I really think it should go away. (Note, by the way, that this argument is completely unrelated to whether or not we should have upstream-unmaintained packages in the tree. As long as a Gentoo dev is willing to look after those packages when necessary, then I see no reason we shouldn't have those packages.) -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76
pgpci6MNIfVNI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
