[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Request for Removal: Unmaintained libppd in Debian



On 31/08/2023 12:30, Christoph Biedl wrote:
Greetings,

we had this discussion on printing several months ago ...

Till Kamppeter wrote...

On 25/12/2022 10:20, Christoph Biedl wrote:

This however should be discussed with all the related package
maintainers and on debian-devel as well. Nothing I can afford to spend
time on right now given the bookworm freeze timeline.

OK, let us aim for complete LPD/LPR/LPRng/legacy-libppd/gpr removal for
bookworm+1 ...

Well, back then we came up with a decision for libppd but the process
that followed did not go quite well (read: It was fairly demotivating
for me). Since then, bookworm was released. And I've seen you're going
to present something at DebConf[1] - which unfortunately I will not
attend in person but I'll try online.


The presentation on DebConf will be even the transition from the original CUPS realm to a second, new CUPS realm, ...

So, it's a good time to resume that topic. DebConf might be as well the
right moment to initiate a "Let's remove lpr-based printing from Debian"
discussion. How would you assess the situation and ideas today?


... so in my opinion as CUPS already well established and making its way to the New Architecture after 20+ years in its original architecture, and that not only in Debian, and therefore everything LPR/LPDish not being maintained any more, we should really remove the old LPR/LPD-based remainders from the Debian distro.

On the removal it can happen that one or another user complains, but there are millions using CUPS and content with it. Maintaining Debian packages of upstream-unmaintained software only for a handful of people is not worthwhile.

Without having looked into the old discussions, so just from memory:
Unike last December I'm more inclined today to just kick the old stuff
out of Debian, in my area that would be my legacy libppd and gpr which
depends on it. The latter would require some interaction with the
maintainer, but we could at least give that a try.

"maintainer" of gpr? Debian package or upstream? If there is a Debian package maintainer insisting on gpr's continuation, they should tell us why.

I would really remove all this from Debian.

   Till


Reply to: