Bug#888657: ladish: should this package be removed?

[trebmuh at tuxfamily.org]

Le 2018-01-28 14:38, Simon McVittie a écrit :
> Source: flowcanvas
> Severity: important
> User: debian-qa at lists.debian.org
> Usertags: proposed-removal
> Control: clone -1 -2
> Control: reassign -2 ladish
> Control: retitle -2 ladish: should this package be removed?
> 
> flowcanvas depends on numerous obsolete GNOME 2-era libraries
> (e.g. #885095) and hasn't had a maintainer upload since 2009. Its 
> upstream
> website says:
> 
>     **Note**: FlowCanvas is dead, long live Ganv!
> 
> ganv is also in Debian as src:ganv; it's orphaned in Debian, but 
> appears
> to have commit activity upstream.
> 
> flowcanvas has one reverse-dependency in Debian, gladish (src:ladish),
> whose most recent maintainer upload was in 2014. web.archive.org says
> the ladish.org website has been down since mid 2014.

ladish looks to be maintained by alessio (last commit 20 Apr 2017) here 
:
https://github.com/alessio/ladish/
(the same goes laditools as well)



> These packages both seem like candidates for removal from unstable.

It would be a big regression from a user point of view since it'll 
remove
the "studio" (reopen everything in one-click) from Debian with no 
alternative.



>> If you agree, please reassign this bug to the ftp team with
>> control at bugs.debian.org commands similar to these:
>> 
>> severity xxxxxx normal
>> reassign xxxxxx ftp.debian.org
>> retitle xxxxxx RM: flowcanvas -- RoQA; depends on obsolete libraries,
>> superseded by ganv
>> 
>> severity yyyyyy normal
>> reassign yyyyyy ftp.debian.org
>> retitle yyyyyy RM: ladish -- RoQA; depends on obsolete libraries,
>> appears unmaintained upstream
>> 
>> (replacing RoQA with RoM if you are a maintainer of the appropriate 
>> package).
>> 
>> Thanks,
>>     smcv

Hope that helps.
Olivier