Mailing List Archive

On Saturday 21 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> # Samuli Suominen <drac@gentoo.org> (21 Jul 2007)
> # Last release from 1999, still using GTK+-1.2.
> # Masked for removal in 30 days.
> x11-misc/fsv

in other words, you have no real reason for punting this package ?
-mike

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 01:27:32 -0400
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Saturday 21 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > # Samuli Suominen <drac@gentoo.org> (21 Jul 2007)
> > # Last release from 1999, still using GTK+-1.2.
> > # Masked for removal in 30 days.
> > x11-misc/fsv
> in other words, you have no real reason for punting this package ?
> -mike

well, for me gtk+-1.2 and no intentions of upgrading it to version 2
from upstream is a valid reason, BUT it doesn't draw the graphics
correctly and seems broken with current mesa -- draws white artifacts.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Sunday 22 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Saturday 21 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > > # Samuli Suominen <drac@gentoo.org> (21 Jul 2007)
> > > # Last release from 1999, still using GTK+-1.2.
> > > # Masked for removal in 30 days.
> > > x11-misc/fsv
> >
> > in other words, you have no real reason for punting this package ?
>
> well, for me gtk+-1.2 and no intentions of upgrading it to version 2
> from upstream is a valid reason

punting a package because you disagree with the implementation is not a valid
reason. nor is an upstream who hasnt touched a package in ages. there are
plenty of packages in system which could be punted using this reasoning
leaving Gentoo broken.

> BUT it doesn't draw the graphics correctly and seems broken with current
> mesa -- draws white artifacts.

if the package doesnt function properly, that is a reason. it runs fine for
me, but i'm not interested in supporting the package.
-mike

On Saturday 28 July 2007, Ryan Hill wrote:
> But the point is upstream not
> maintaining something is not reason enough for removing it. Upstream
> not maintaining it and it being broken is. Upstream not maintaining it
> and it being an unwanted pain in the ass is also popular one.

all correct
-mike

Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Sunday 22 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> > > # Last release from 1999, still using GTK+-1.2.
>> >
>> > in other words, you have no real reason for punting this package ?
>>
>> well, for me gtk+-1.2 and no intentions of upgrading it to version 2
>> from upstream is a valid reason
>
> punting a package because you disagree with the implementation is not a
> valid reason. nor is an upstream who hasnt touched a package in ages.
> there are plenty of packages in system which could be punted using this
> reasoning leaving Gentoo broken.
>
I tried to get some clarity on this wrt bug 140498 ("GTK+-1.2 needs to
die" ;-)) which seemed to contradict Mr Frysinger. Summary:
<dev> "Upstream no longer maintaining it is a fine reason, and commonly
given.. system, kernel, and toolchain are special." [maintainer's
discretion for most stuff iow]

aiui, if there are no bugs the package goes to maintainer-wanted so a user
can pick it up for sunrise.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Steve Long wrote:

> aiui, if there are no bugs the package goes to maintainer-wanted so a user
> can pick it up for sunrise.

Almost. Sunrise can only handle maintainer-needed packages; those that
aren't in the tree yet.

--
dirtyepic you'd be tossed up or wash up, the narrator relates
gentoo org in a spartan antarctican walk for many days
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Ryan Hill wrote:
> Steve Long wrote:
>
>> aiui, if there are no bugs the package goes to maintainer-wanted so a user
>> can pick it up for sunrise.
>
> Almost. Sunrise can only handle maintainer-needed packages; those that
> aren't in the tree yet.

Bah, I screwed that up. s/needed/wanted/ So yeah, you're right, if it
was removed it could go into Sunrise. But the point is upstream not
maintaining something is not reason enough for removing it. Upstream
not maintaining it and it being broken is. Upstream not maintaining it
and it being an unwanted pain in the ass is also popular one.


--
dirtyepic you'd be tossed up or wash up, the narrator relates
gentoo org in a spartan antarctican walk for many days
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list