Peter Bonivart <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 2012/11/12 <[email protected]> >> > What's the rationale behind the removal of albumshaper from the catalog ? >> >> From another posting[1]: >> >> """While at it we dropped a whole bunch of packages probably no longer >> useful or unmaintained. If any of your active packages is involved we >> apologize in advance and would kindly request a rebuild.""" >> >> So you have been apologized to for it in advance, and it's been >> requested that you rebuild albumshaper and upload it. > > But in this case albumshaper was updated just a few months ago by > Peter F himself so it should be considered actively maintained. Why > did someone consider the package to be "not useful" without asking the > maintainer first? Or is there a technical reason for it having to be > rebuilt just now? That's not clear by the apology. > > I think it would have been better to publish a list of packages > supposed to be deleted from the catalog and let others have an opinion > about them instead of just removing them and apologizing in general > for it. I from time to time get emails about not maintaining a package > any longer so someone either updated my package or it got removed > without me getting any info about it. It annoys me.
As I said, I wished only to have the rationale. But discussion is good anyway and I agree with you. -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
