Re: Thought about unmaintained package (Net_IRC in this case)

From: Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:48:24 +0000
Subject: Re: Thought about unmaintained package (Net_IRC in this case)
References: 1 2 3 4  Groups: php.pear.qa 
Request: Send a blank email to pear-qa+get-2187@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
Helgi Þormar wrote:
Anyway if a developer says he's not going to maintain the package anymore, not even bug fixes, and there is a superior package that has all the features and more, then I think we should move the bugs to suspended until further notice. We of course need to be able to deprecate in such a way (well just a extra field in the package table) so we can make the installer more aware that the package is deprecated, so it can give messages like "This package has been deprecated, are you sure you want to install [y][N]" or something like that.
Well, FWIW (and I fully understand that my karma around here is "pending"), I'm +1 (and I also understand that there are more formal processes than 'tally up the +1's' in PEAR) on this. Package deprecation, ESPECIALLY when superceded by a superior package, is a fact of life, and a formal process to facilitate this in a controlled manner is important, IMO. S

« previous php.pear.qa (#2187) next »