Hi Miriam,
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:53:27AM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
>
> Well, mencal and cycle are by far more limited than pcalendar and, as you say, they are dead upstream. In my opinion their only advantages is that mencal works in the console, and cycle is coded in python and is lighter than pcalendar, which is coded in Java and is somehow bigger. In any case, pcalendar is the most serious of the three, the other two are nice but are too simple and unreliable in general. Cycle would really need a major code revision, to be honest. I'm concerned for the users who would like to keep their data, anyway, so it might be wise to make a tiny piece of code to convert its data to something useful for other programs, maybe to pcalendar itself, before removing it. In any case, as I said, pcalendar is heavier, and I wonder if anyone is using cycle in a tiny computer where pcalendar might not work. It works OK in my tiny atom netbook, though.
>
> My personal opinion is that pcalendar overpasses them both, anyway. In any case, I'd give it some time before doing anything, as both mencal and cycle seem to have some users according to popcon. Unless they stop working for any reason and need serious fixing, of course.
Thanks for your evaluation which is really helpful. As a consequence I
decreased cycle and mencal from Depends to Suggests in the metapackage
task. In addition I added a remark to the packages which will show up
on the tasks page after next cron run which will recommend users to
prefer pcalendar over the other options.
Now lets see how popcon evolves before we might delete the other
options.
> Thanks!! :)
We are happy about your expertise which the majority of people here on
this list is unfortunately lacking.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de