686-smp kernels old?

[Colin Watson]

On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 08:03:28PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 01:51:46PM -0400, Derek Broughton wrote:
> > Wow!  You make trouble for yourself where none exists to begin with.  I fail
> > to see how "morgued" can be any more drastic than "removed".  If I say
> > "please _remove_ this package", you don't know anything more about what I
> > mean.  I may very well want it removed because of all of the above...
> 
> *shrug* I can only speak from experience helping to administer the
> Ubuntu archive ... "morgued" in my experience is just flat-out
> misleading, and further serves to confuse those using the term as to how
> the archive works when packages are removed. Sorry.

As evidence of this confusion, look at:

  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Documentation/Todo

"MorgueCandidates (not sure if this is in use anymore. morgue.ubuntu.com
hasn't been updated since June)"

Unnecessary confusion caused by needless jargon. The fact that
morgue.ubuntu.com (a mirror of the archive's internal trashcan for files
that have been removed from the archive) is unrelated to package
removals. If people weren't using the jargon "morgue", they probably
wouldn't be confused into thinking that a problem with morgue.ubuntu.com
has any bearing on whether it's possible to remove packages from the
archive.

  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MorgueCandidates

"This page intends to be a list and a place for discussion on packages
to be put in [WWW] http://morgue.ubuntu.com/ and not be supported any
more."

Again, packages don't automatically go to morgue.ubuntu.com just because
they're removed, and it's not really helpful to look at
morgue.ubuntu.com anyway unless you're looking for a particular old file
(which might have been removed altogether, or simply superseded by a
newer version of the same package).

Cheers,

-- 
Colin Watson                                       [cjwatson at ubuntu.com]