Bug#817199: transcode: should this package be removed?
Am Sonntag, den 13.03.2016, 21:25 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher: > Yes, dvdwizard would have to be RoQ-ed if we are going to remove > transcode. But it's also dead upstream and orphaned. Alright, let's go for it. Anyway, since transcode is a command-line utility, it should be rather straightforward to convert dvdwizard to use something more advanced, e.g. ffmpeg. But until someone who urgently needs dvdwizard volunteers to do this, I think it should be alright to remove it from the archive. - Fabian signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#817199: transcode: should this package be removed?
Control: reassign -1 ftp.debian.org Control: severity -1 normal Control: retitle -1 RM: transcode -- RoM; dead upstream, replacements exist Control: clone -1 -2 Control: retitle -2 RM: dvdwizard -- RoQA; orphaned, dead upstream, blocking transcode removal Control: block -1 by -2 On 2016-03-18 09:58:52, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 13.03.2016, 21:25 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher: > > Yes, dvdwizard would have to be RoQ-ed if we are going to remove > > transcode. But it's also dead upstream and orphaned. > > Alright, let's go for it. > > Anyway, since transcode is a command-line utility, it should be rather > straightforward to convert dvdwizard to use something more advanced, > e.g. ffmpeg. But until someone who urgently needs dvdwizard volunteers > to do this, I think it should be alright to remove it from the archive. Dear FTP masters, please remove transcode from unstable. From my initial mail in this bug report: > transcode is dead upstream since many years and it is also no longer really > maintained Debian. We just keep sticking patches on top of it. I suppose most > of its use-cases are also covered by other tools already available in Debian. > Also, support for modern containers like mp4 is still very limited. So I think > it's time to let it go. Also, transcode will become RC-buggy once the ffmpeg 3.0 transition starts. transcode has one reverse dependency: dvdwizard. dvdwizard is also dead upstream and orphaned. Please remove it too. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#817199: transcode: should this package be removed?
Hi On 2016-03-09 16:42:20, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 08.03.2016, 23:39 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher: > > What do you think? > > No objections, except for this: > > $ apt-cache rdepends transcode > transcode > Reverse Depends: > transcode-doc > xjadeo > transcode-dbg > multimedia-video > python-mecavideo > dvdwizard > > It appears that at least dvdwizard has a hard Depends on transcode. Yes, dvdwizard would have to be RoQ-ed if we are going to remove transcode. But it's also dead upstream and orphaned. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#817199: transcode: should this package be removed?
Am Dienstag, den 08.03.2016, 23:39 +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher: > What do you think? No objections, except for this: $ apt-cache rdepends transcode transcode Reverse Depends: transcode-doc xjadeo transcode-dbg multimedia-video python-mecavideo dvdwizard It appears that at least dvdwizard has a hard Depends on transcode. - Fabian signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#817199: transcode: should this package be removed?
Package: transcode Version: 3:1.1.7-9 Severity: serious Tags: sid stretch transcode is dead upstream since many years and it is also no longer really maintained Debian. We just keep sticking patches on top of it. I suppose most of its use-cases are also covered by other tools already available in Debian. Also, support for modern containers like mp4 is still very limited. So I think it's time to let it go. What do you think? Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher signature.asc Description: PGP signature
