On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 20:36:37 -0500, Richard Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 01/11/2010 06:30 PM, Arnaud Launay wrote: >> >> As a newsmaster, I'm a bit concerned by this. > > Yeah, inn seems like a really high-profile package to mask for removal. > It would be conspicuous in its absence. > > Would it make sense to post on -dev BEFORE masking packages like this? > I'm sure there are lots of people who would chip in before something > like this dies.
(A general reply, not targeted towards you, Rich) Speaking on behalf of the treecleaners: The fact is, some of us have never heard of "inn" and until Gentoo has some sort of "popularity tracking" software/tool, the treecleaners will continue to mask unmaintained software. We can't possible know about every package in the tree and if it looks like it is unmaintained (open bugs w/o action) then we will mask it for removal unless someone fixes it and maintains it. Let's all move on here and be happy that someone is now maintaining such a popular package. Thanks jer/rej - I'll add you to metadata so it doesn't become unmaintained again :) Wasn't there a GSoC project on popularity of packages? Let's get it implemented already! ;) -Jeremy > > Right now lots of users are going to get errors due to a masked package > until somebody takes the initiative to fix it. I suspect that nobody > wants to poke their head up and risk getting it shot off by doing > something like that... > > Perhaps Gentoo needs a little more of Wikipedia's "Be Bold" attitude and > a little less of their "delete first and ask questions later" attitude. > > Note - I'm not suggesting the problem shouldn't be fixed - I'm just > suggesting that in this case the solution is worse than the original > problem. > > Rich
