[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [extra] repository cleanup

[Harlequin]

But heiko makes a point. If an unsupported package still worked, without compiling or something like that, why would you drop it? The idea with a new "unsupported" repo is not bad. You have got the binaries, but you are also saying: "this program will probably not work. We take no responsibility" 



"Ng Oon-Ee" <ngoonee at gmail.com> schrieb:

>On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 16:47 +0100, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
>> On Wednesday 17 November 2010 16:37:41 甘露(Gan Lu) wrote:
>> > If some says  "this is shame", "I'm leaving",
>> > "you suck", "developers are selfish",  you could certainly discard
>> > them, but not I or Heiko, we just talk about our opinion.
>> > Does a great community contain only TU/devs? Does Arch is driven by
>> > them alone? If you think so what a upstream developer will think
>you
>> > are?
>> A tester.
>> 
>I lol-ed.
>
>And Gan Lu, I'm not sure which thread you've been following, but Heiko
>specifically references something along the lines of "I may as well go
>back to Gentoo".
>
>In the end this just sounds like "I'm going to whine because MY
>packages
>got deprecated". Repeatedly I see unfounded statements like 'popular
>and
>important packages'. Something like firefox or gcc is popular and
>important. The rest is niche. If the devs want to maintain them, fine,
>there's rules for that. If not, just go and compile it. It moves the
>burden of work to the person who cares about the package (which is
>obviously not the dev).

-- 
This message has been sent from my android phone with k-9 mail