On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 10:03:25PM +0300, Konstantinos Karantias wrote:
I'm not a TU, but I don't agree. Package sources may not be updated by then, so the packages doesn't actually need any modifications.
In my opinion, you should examine every package in detail before deleting it.
(In other words, I agree with Xyne :P)
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Xyne <xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
Brad Fanella wrote:
Hi TUs,
I've just created a new proposal concerning the orphaning of all
On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 07:54:42PM +0200, Jakob Gruber wrote: packages
marked 'out of date' which have not been updated (or submitted) since before January 1st, 2009. For details, see the actual proposal text.
The voting period ends on October 10th, please cast your votes!
schuay
Yeah, as long as they haven't been updated for a while (as you said, January 1st, 2009), then I'm all for it!
Thanks, Brad
I've cast a "yes" vote. I also move to name this "Operation Oliver Twist" and to name the orphaning script "twister".
One problem that might arise though is if a stable package (i.e. one that almost never gets updated upstream) has been recently flagged out-of-date then it might get orphaned (a malicious user who is aware of the impending operation might even write a script to flag such packages out-of-date). Perhaps you could cross-reference the last activity of the maintainer when deciding whether to delete a package, e.g. last package action <= 2009-01-01 and last maintainer action <= xxxx-xx-xx.
That shouldn't add much complexity to the code but it might improve the handling of a few fringe cases. I'm really just floating the idea though.
Regards, Xyne
Also, I know this was only mentioned on the TU voting page, but there are currently 525 packages that are out of date that fit into this category. Checking/orphaning all of them by hand wouldn't be practical. -- Brad