Bug 489550

Summary:	dev-libs/jrtplib removal request
Product:	Gentoo Linux	Reporter:	Pacho Ramos <pacho>
Component:	Current packages	Assignee:	No maintainer - Look at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers if you want to take care of it <maintainer-needed>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED
Severity:	normal	CC:	treecleaner
Priority:	Normal
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Package list:		Runtime testing required:	---

Description Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev

2013-10-27 09:59:53 UTC

Was use by the long gone farsight1, which is no longer in the tree, should
have died along with it.

Comment 1 Dion Moult (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2014-01-27 05:00:37 UTC

<Moult> ddep dev-libs/jrtplib
<willikins> No packages have a reverse DEPEND on dev-libs/jrtplib.
<Moult> rdep dev-libs/jrtplib
<willikins> No packages have a reverse RDEPEND on dev-libs/jrtplib.
<Moult> ddep dev-libs/jthread
<willikins> Reverse DEPEND for dev-libs/jthread: dev-libs/jrtplib-3.9.1
<Moult> rdep dev-libs/jthread
<willikins> Reverse RDEPEND for dev-libs/jthread: dev-libs/jrtplib-3.9.1

# Dion Moult <moult@gentoo.org> (27 Jan 2014)
# Mask for removal in 30 days. Used to be used by farsight1 but no longer. No
# other reverse deps. (bug #489550)
dev-libs/jrtplib
dev-libs/jthread

Comment 2 Sergey Popov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2014-01-27 08:32:08 UTC

I am sorry, but i am the maintainer of dev-libs/jthread and you forgot to add me in CC. And i am strongly against of removing them unless there are severe breakages in them.

Is there some other reason than 'no reverse dependencies in tree' for removing this libs?

Will proceed with unmasking in a week if nobody answers.

Comment 3 Samuli Suominen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2014-01-27 17:57:51 UTC

(In reply to Sergey Popov from comment #2)
> I am sorry, but i am the maintainer of dev-libs/jthread and you forgot to
> add me in CC. And i am strongly against of removing them unless there are
> severe breakages in them.
> 
> Is there some other reason than 'no reverse dependencies in tree' for
> removing this libs?
> 
> Will proceed with unmasking in a week if nobody answers.

what's the point of saving the library? isn't it orphan, as in, has no in-tree consumers?
and if it was part of farsight1, isn't the upstream also dead then and if it's orphan currently, the library usage should be discouraged for new development by removing it from the tree?

Comment 4 Sergey Popov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2014-01-29 16:21:25 UTC

(In reply to Samuli Suominen from comment #3)
> what's the point of saving the library? isn't it orphan, as in, has no
> in-tree consumers?
> and if it was part of farsight1, isn't the upstream also dead then and if
> it's orphan currently, the library usage should be discouraged for new
> development by removing it from the tree?

I use jthread in one of my little projects. I do not mind about nuking jrtplib - it's maintainer-needed@, but if jthread has no issues with security or serious build/run-time failures, i would prefer to keep it in main tree.

Dead upstream is not sufficient to remove package from tree IMO.

Comment 5 Sergey Popov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2014-02-05 07:25:04 UTC

I have unmasked dev-libs/jthread

Comment 6 Dion Moult (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2014-03-24 07:22:12 UTC

dev-libs/jrtplib has been removed from tree.