On 10/23/2011 09:10 PM, Jonathan Conder wrote:

On 24 October 2011 01:42, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

...

On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 02:10:48 +1300 Jonathan Conder wrote:

...

Hi TUs,

In a few days I will be orphaning my package mediatomb, and will delete it too unless anyone is interested in maintaining it. It has been unmaintained upstream for over a year, and currently I don't have enough time to deal with the issues that keep cropping up because of this. At the moment it isn't even installed on my main computer. Thought I'd just let people know first, in case anyone else is interested in maintaining it, and to give my reasons for dropping it.

Thanks, Jonathan why would you delete the package? I still use MT. orphan as you want, but it's not because upstream is inactive that you should remove the package IMHO. I was under the impression that it didn't currently work, but on closer inspection it looks like one of the bugs was invalid. Maybe it should stay then, but unless someone is willing to maintain it I think we should encourage new users to look for an alternative (by removing it from the repos).

...

Dieter I'm just a noob to the lists, but I don't understand why non-maintained mediatomb equates to a package that is no longer relevant to anyone. Unless it is severely broken, I would think that many would appreciate it continuing on in the repos. At worst, don't delete it, but relegate it to AUR instead. I use mediatomb in my home and would hate to see a loss of the package. In aur, most are aware that, "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit".

----- Original message -----

On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 22:06:02 -0600 Mike Bedwell wrote:

...

On 10/23/2011 09:10 PM, Jonathan Conder wrote:

...

...

On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 02:10:48 +1300 Jonathan Conder  wrote:

...

Hi TUs,

In a few days I will be orphaning my package mediatomb, and will delete it too unless anyone is interested in maintaining it. It has been unmaintained upstream for over a year, and currently I don't have enough time to deal with the issues that keep cropping up because of this. At the moment it isn't even installed on my main computer. Thought I'd just let people know first, in case anyone else is interested in maintaining it, and to give my reasons for dropping it.

Thanks, Jonathan why would you delete the package? I still use MT.  orphan as you want, but it's not because upstream is inactive that you should remove the package IMHO. I was under the impression that it didn't currently work, but on closer inspection it looks like one of the bugs was invalid. Maybe it should stay then, but unless someone is willing to maintain it I

On 24 October 2011 01:42, Dieter Plaetinck wrote: think we should encourage new users to look for an alternative (by removing it from the repos).

...

Dieter I'm just a noob to the lists, but I don't understand why non-maintained mediatomb equates to a package that is no longer relevant to anyone. Unless it is severely broken, I would think that many would appreciate it continuing on in the repos.  At worst, don't delete it, but relegate it to AUR instead.  I use mediatomb in my home and would hate to see a loss of the package.  In aur, most are aware that, "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit".

Btw, i falsely assumed that MT was already in AUR and Jonathan planned to remove it from AUR. so I'm not sure what exactly he meant with "dropping" then... removing from the repo but not uploading in AUR? that only means someone else will create a new PKGBUILD and upload it to AUR. you could save that person some work :)

Dieter

Sorry for the confusion. By 'drop' I meant move it from community to the AUR. Jonathan