Re: Retirement of Ruby 1.8.7

[Takahiro Kambe <taca%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

Hi,

In message <rmiegpbednf.fsf%fnord.ir.bbn.com@localhost>
	on Fri, 27 Feb 2015 07:34:44 -0500,
	Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost> wrote:
> As the usual objector, can you explain the situation more?
Thank you for your questions.

>  - Is the presence of ruby 1.8 causing actual problems?
Many ruby packages (especially rubygem based) drop Ruby 1.8 support
and those pacakges would need to set RUBY_VERSION_SUPPORTED explicitly.

>  - Is it no longer getting security patches?
No.  It was EOL 30th Jun, 2013.

>  - How long has it been since it's been unreasonable for a package not
>    to work with newer ruby than 1.8?
Above EOL date would be its answer.

>  - It seems amarok-kde3 is an old version of amarok.
Yes, it is old and it looks not maintained (from KDE's site).

>    Do you think there are any users?
I do not know and I'm not MAINTAINER and I did not import it.

>    Is it reasonable to be using it (is it still getting
>    security patches)?
I do not know it is really work or not now.

>  - Would amarok-kde3 be a candidate for deletion in its own right?
??

> Really my point is "I want to remove X, so therefore Y should go" is
> uncomfortable logic.  Instead I think we should say "X is crufty and
> probably should go.  Y dpeends on it.  So what is the situation for Y --
> upstream maintenance, users, etc -- and evaluate Y in its own right.."
I should write as latter...

-- 
Takahiro Kambe <taca%NetBSD.org@localhost>/<taca%back-street.net@localhost>