Re: List of deletion candidates

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

nia <nia%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:

> hi, i'm okay with this.
>
> - because it's rust, they're all leaf packages. their removal
>   is unlikely to cause any harm.
>
> - because it's rust, deleting them reduces bulk loads significantly,
>   much fewer distfiles, etc.
>
> - because it's rust, there will be code rot eventually that we have
>   to face.
>
> - because these packages are relatively recent additions,
>   they are unlikely to have long term users that are heavily dependent
>   on them.

Those are fair points.  I didn't mean to say "no we shouldn't delete
them", just that I would like to see a balancing of "do we believe there
are users" and "what is the harm", and that I often find that missing in
removal proposals, even though I suspect it's in the heads of the
proposers.  You've made a good case that the cleanup benefit is greater
than then downside.