[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs bacula, bacula_client, bacula_client_(...)

[Ben Walton]

Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Mon May 16 12:24:27 -0400 2011:

> The issue here is not about dropping it from the catalog. Its
> obsolete, I'm all for dropping it.

> The problem here is that you are going BEYOND that, and forcibly
> removing a package that a user may wish to keep, without delivering
> them an automatic upgrade for it.

Which is _exactly_ what an update of the last debian release to have
the package to the first release that didn't have it would do.  It's
no longer part of bacula.  It should disappear.  Again though, please
waste _your_ time if you want to see it remain available.

I'll post to users@ to warn users of the change.  They're reasonable
people.  They'll understand.  And if they don't want to update and
lose the package, they can sit on the old version of the entire suite.

This is ridiculous.

> > Well, both current and unstable are moving targets.  Versions can and
> > do change.  If we were talking about stable, that would be different.
> 
> "current", effectively becomes 'stable', if this new "workflow" is
> voted in.

I don't think you understand the proposal.

> >> That is of course, presuming that they even COULD file a
> >> bug. because once bacula_gnome is removed from the catalog, usual
> >> practice is to disable the corresponding mantis areas also.
> >
> > Our users can't figure out how to file a bug?
> 
> Please re-read that paragraph, slowly. It seems like you didnt
> actually read it.

In more words than I used last night, you're effectively saying that
an intelligent person going to file a bug against bacula_gnome
wouldn't (upon finding it missing) file the bug against bacula or
bacula_client, etc.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302