On 2013-03-06, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:45:45PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote: >> Please remove tty-clock. It's got lots of issues that aren't really >> being worked on (bug #700738). It also has no reverse-dependencies >> and has yet to be included in a stable release. > > The bug you quote was filed on 16th Feb, and the most recent message was > from the maintainer just two days ago. I see little evidence that the > problems aren't being dealt with, just that they haven't been fixed as > quickly as you would like. > > You should also include the maintainer, or at least the bug you quote, in > your RM proposal. It's not like Antoine is MIA. I would be a bit insulted > if this were my package. > > I am CCing Antoine to give a chance to rebut your request. Right... I am not sure what issues you are refering to, but if it's only #700738, this addresses "unsafeties" in the code. One very specific issue with "use after free" calls has been addressed and David mentionned something about there being other issues when ran under valgrind. I don't believe those should warrant a complete removal from wheezy. At most, if the known use-after-free issues are *not* patched in a timely manner, I agree the package should be removed, but those already have a patch. If you know what the other issues are, I suggest you make a clearer explanation of what those are instead of asking for a complete exclusion of this package. (I was not insulted by the RM proposal, but would have appreciated being CC'd in the original request...) Awaiting your feedback, A.
Attachment:
pgpwEpWyBWzCd.pgp
Description: PGP signature