On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Michael Mol <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, September 16, 2016 09:54:42 PM Duncan wrote: > > Kristian Fiskerstrand posted on Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:58:22 +0200 as > > > > excerpted: > > > On 09/16/2016 02:31 PM, Hanno Böck wrote: > > >> media-gfx/skencil is a python-written vector graphics tool. It was > once > > >> popular before inkscape became the de-facto-standard. It hasn't seen > > >> any upstream activity for a decade(!), but surprisingly it still seems > > >> to work. > > >> > > >> I haven't used it for many years myself. > > >> > > >> There are 4 open bugs in bugzilla. > > >> > > >> Anyone interested in taking it? (else the usual: will be reassigned to > > >> maintainer-needed) > > > > > > Also sounds like a candidate for treecleaning / moving to an overlay > and > > > not keeping non-upstream maintained things in tree if nobody want to > > > take the maintainer burden of it. > > > > Why treeclean it, if it still works and can still be built against in- > > tree python? > > > > Sometimes mature packages don't get further maintenance because they > > "just work" as they are, and don't _need_ to eventually be bloated to > > include email and browsing functionality or whatever. > > > > Of course if it requires old python and eventually the last supported in- > > tree python is being removed, and nobody steps up to update it then, > > /then/ it should be removed from the tree as it'll be broken /then/, but > > that's not the case now, as Hanno explicitly said it still seems to work. > > It needs a maintainer. Are you offering? > > Packages without maintainers anywhere along the line (either local or > upstream) risk having security vulnerabilities go unfixed (or even > unacknowledged) simply from having nobody who actually cares about the > package. Very little "just works", even if it appears to, after a decade or > two of little to no modifications or maintenance, if only because hidden > assumptions the software makes about its environment cease to hold true. > > The current policy is to not remove stuff unless it is actually broken. -A > So long as it continues to "just work", the work involved in being a proxy > maintainer should be next to nil. If it doesn't continue to just work, > then at > least you have a better idea about what's going on...you might even find > effective ways to deal with the problem, either by fixing the package > yourself > or providing backpressure on the environment changes that have broken (or > threaten to break) it. > > -- > :wq
