Re: long-broken packages (some are removal candidates)

[John Marino <netbsd%marino.st@localhost>]

On 4/2/2012 20:16, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
> Step forward and fix them then. You haven't tried so far, have you?
> Perhaps, it is not hard with some diligence and at least minimal knowledge.
> If you don't want to fix them, don't touch them then. Please, spend your
> efforts on anything more constructive than pushing your views which packages
> deserve to live and which do not.

Where I'm from, this is called hypocrisy.  My response was to yours, 
which pushed views on which packages deserve to live.  And yes, I tried 
to fix a number of them including stlport, aqsis, centericq, ArX and 
ocamlduce.

> I know that this is harsh, but you force me to be harsh.

I would have used a different adjective.

> I don't have time to deal with all this at once, and all you do with your
> proposal is nothing but forcing your personal views which packages are
> useful to people outside you or your community and which are not based
> on reports for one particular operating system (NetBSD) running on one
> particular platform (amd64).

It's got nothing to do with usefulness.  If it's broken, and nobody 
*including you* is intending to fix it, then the pragmatic thing to do 
is kill it rather than leave it for more *years* on the broken list.

> We have people slowly adopting pkgsrc on other systems, for other uses
> and slowly fixing arising issues one by one. Your attitude "lets' remove
> parallel/sge since following reports it fails for a long time" only harms
> pkgsrc acceptance.

Why am I starting to think that you believe I'm David?

John