On 09/07/16 at 11:51am, Genes Lists via arch-general wrote: > > After the recent dicsussion(s) around this topic I thought it > worthwhile to go through where things stand. > > I went through all the packages flagged out of date on the website > and focused on what I viewed as the "more important" ones (this is IMHO > of course ... I'm sure others have differnt views). Regardless of how > out of date a package is, if a new package was in testing I did not > include it here. Not sure what you are trying to achieve with this email, but it's actually a bit worse. We have 189 (i686/x86_64 included) packages which are out of date for more than 30 days in our repos. Then again I don't have any historical data of how many out of date packages we usually have. -- Jelle van der Waa
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
