Takahiro Kambe <taca%back-street.net@localhost> writes: > In message <20150226161059.GA9346%britannica.bec.de@localhost> > on Thu, 26 Feb 2015 17:10:59 +0100, > Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> wrote: >>> >> audio/amarok-kde3 > ... > >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:26:59AM +0900, Takahiro Kambe wrote: >>> * Ruby 1.8 >>> (programming language, used for scoring, lyrics, last.fm streams) >>> http://www.ruby-lang.org >> >> So a few plugins that can be disabled. That's not that essential. > I wish someone to do it. If not, I have no choice but remove it. As the usual objector, can you explain the situation more? - Is the presence of ruby 1.8 causing actual problems? - Is it no longer getting security patches? - How long has it been since it's been unreasonable for a package not to work with newer ruby than 1.8? - It seems amarok-kde3 is an old version of amarok. Do you think there are any users? Is it reasonable to be using it (is it still getting security patches)? - 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.." My quick glancing at things leads me to believe that amarok-kde3 is so old as to be unreasonable to use. The newer amarok 2.8 is already 1.5 years old upstream, and there's no evidence of continues maintenance of 1.4.10 - the last release was 2008-08-13, which is 6.5 years ago. All that said, I don't use kde, and I know there's been some 3/4 angst...
Description: PGP signature