[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Rationale for package removals?



Havoc Pennington wrote:

> "Carlos 'Fjrb' Almeida" <fjrb@netcabo.pt> writes:
> > How so ? I'm using it here in with the Beta 2. Beats R-C-Packages by a
> > mile.
> >
>
> It had a metric ton of bugs in bugzilla. Maybe all the bug reporters
> were hallucinating, but I doubt it. ;-)
>
> In any case, bugs or no, it was unmaintained and dead-endish. It
> needed a lot of work.

Back on the original question, i think it's reasonable of end users (like
me) to expect an explanation for the removal of packages, and preferably an
alternative recommended.  I've got this list so far in terms of removed
packages and their alternatives:

   * ee: eog, gqview, kuickshow, nautilus, konqueror, or gimp
   * gnorpm: redhat-config-packages

Can these be listed in the release notes so that people know where to start
looking for replacements?  Here are some others i think would be worth
mentioning:

   * elm, metamail: mutt
   * gnome-pim: evolution?
   * ical: evolution?
   * netscape: mozilla, konqueror
   * pump: dhcpclient
   * rxvt: xterm
   * xlockmore: xscreensaver?
   * kaffe: gcj?
   * fvwm2: sawfish/kwm/whatever

And here's my list of unexplained removals:

   * gnomeicu
   * jikes

Where i can ask about these?

Paul
http://paulgear.webhop.net




_______________________________________________
Limbo-list mailing list
Limbo-list@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/limbo-list

[Kernel]     [Red Hat Install]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

Powered by Linux