Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Barin Montpris Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Remove trac from Debian 11? Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 14:10:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Mon May 10 12:03:11 2021 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.9 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, MURPHY_SCAM1=0.1, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: NOT_IN_SBL_XBL_SPAMHAUS=-1.5 CL_IP_EQ_HELO_IP=-2 (check from: .hashvault. - helo: .mail-qt1-x82d.google. - helo-domain: .google.) FROM/MX_MATCHES_HELO(DOMAIN)=-2; rate: -5.5 X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532U3ZNR7JuhOFj8iVnrwkZaeRLueXwi6Me8fUUyiGIOCYAL/+wZ ik32vxPGARstqS+C6e1nw7Ii5c+4xhBraOL6EVw= X-Google-SMTP-Source: ABdhPJxf4Zmm3PlGoixXdO9pP7czN3S9nSc/MQLLj5bNjfxmN3m2NxfELNE9neompxqKh4bu7f6JZA== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5d0b:: with SMTP id f11mr22805436qtx.132.1620648174832; Mon, 10 May 2021 05:02:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qDbXVdCdHGoSgWSk" Content-Disposition: inline X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19132 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20210510120252.GA123861@soulreaver.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 42 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Original-Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 07:02:52 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <20210510120252.GA123861@soulreaver.org> X-Original-References: Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:13345 --qDbXVdCdHGoSgWSk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 10:35:41AM +0000, Martin wrote: > Now, while Trac is still maintained upstream and has been ported > to Python 3 recently, development slowed down since long and the > current 1.5.x release series is not yet "there". > > I wonder, whether the package should be part of Debian 11, or > better miss one stable release and have it in better shape for > Debian 12. I don't object. Typically I am against releasing knowingly not ready-to-ship software. If one of the maintainers comes up with a reasonable argument against this view, then we should listen to it. -- Best regards, Barin --qDbXVdCdHGoSgWSk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGzBAABCgAdFiEEamWoEh2ctQvZdf1IHcbm2RQwqBYFAmCZIOwACgkQHcbm2RQw qBaHwwv+PqeJmuEMYKhlz2lESZYWh7BONlIxjpWcmrF3iT94LF26izXdtuntwpkP i+f6PeJhEw/ejsyFfnqjZnn6KeenMAYkFCVKJMFbqHVnmDpnStJO6CihucfbjW6F Pw9a8Aof0RG0jBhDEIA2UT3vbflzMST7HmwRo5HO7+H+o2azXzXaOqF8Yybe6QOL cmdrTTvqW9LBGOfbck+Q/ZOceHilkcpDMZVmiZIMEQtWzoCuAUR0grsKOFOdD64M 9DBywB9vv0Elm4mVzNfNWAxy2E7KLiw82XmIT0n/QcGHuvdAKiIeEbRyZYrUdK7V JVSrlCsp7oo3pKg7Cdo5t3uOyfHTcvKij2gRHERdK0PrQGb+xTRcb1nbUGGsBHEe d66GKtPMFSIjI5JaW01q6xEwOz5AufM243Ubp9ggRtzwtBnaCZuEvVda4eriPBqa WP/bU1XBb9PYezgsCXU+hnQBew4QcCzs+RPXqxBu462jDXDOjV3sac6PcPQTsog4 /5Gv+jq9 =bf1Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qDbXVdCdHGoSgWSk--