Bug #106243 for Gtk2Fu: Gtk2Fu removed without warning or deprecation notice

Mon Aug 03 20:50:48 2015 KENTNL [...] cpan.org - Ticket created

Subject:

Gtk2Fu removed without warning or deprecation notice

I just noticed today that Gtk2Fu has evaporated from CPAN and is now BackPAN only ( meaning it is no longer findable on s.c.o or on metacpan ).

Is there a formal declaration of what the status is here?

I would assume that Gtk2Fu is entirely deprecated and its removal off CPAN is a sign by the author to kill everything that uses it, and to stop packaging it in vendors ( and packaging of it by vendors is why I noticed that it had vanished )

Actually, looking at the Gentoo Changelog here, seems you used to be a Gentoo dev and that's why this is in tree in the first place :D.

And its only dependent, "profuse" was pmasked in Nov 2010 and removed end of december 2010.

So this is basically asking for an ACK was to whether we should be adding this to a treecleaning schedule at some point in the near future, and will be citing this bug as a gentoo bug once there's an ACK

Tue Aug 04 03:33:06 2015 DAMS [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

Hi ! On Mon Aug 03 20:50:48 2015, KENTNL wrote: Show quoted text

> I just noticed today that Gtk2Fu has evaporated from CPAN and is now > BackPAN > only ( meaning it is no longer findable on s.c.o or on metacpan ). > > Is there a formal declaration of what the status is here? > > I would assume that Gtk2Fu is entirely deprecated and its removal off > CPAN is a > sign by the author to kill everything that uses it, and to stop > packaging it in > vendors ( and packaging of it by vendors is why I noticed that it had > vanished > )

Yes exactly. This is very old (and now useless and buggy) software that I doubt is still working properly. Maybe I did a mistake in the way I removed it, and should have followed a better procedure ? If so, sorry about that, feel free to point me to the appropriate documentation as to how to make a cpan istribution properly die. Show quoted text

> > Actually, looking at the Gentoo Changelog here, seems you used to be a > Gentoo > dev and that's why this is in tree in the first place :D.

Indeed, well spotted :) Show quoted text

> > And its only dependent, "profuse" was pmasked in Nov 2010 and removed > end of > december 2010. > > So this is basically asking for an ACK was to whether we should be > adding this > to a treecleaning schedule at some point in the near future, and will > be citing > this bug as a gentoo bug once there's an ACK

ACK. And thank you for your time. Again, if I could have done it differently and better, let me know, so I improve my knowledge on that. If everything is good, please resolve this ticket.

Tue Aug 04 03:33:07 2015 The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

Tue Aug 04 03:49:52 2015 KENTNL [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

On 2015-08-04 19:33:06, DAMS wrote:
>
> ACK. And thank you for your time. Again, if I could have done it
> differently and better, let me know, so I improve my knowledge on
> that.
>

Thanks for the quick reply.

The general pattern these days is to leave the latest version intact, but make its deprecatedness very vividly clear:

http://neilb.org/2015/01/17/deprecated-metadata.html

covers the recommended steps, and its agreed with by a much earlier:

http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=609855

This approach has the benefit that instead of searching for something on a CPAN, or being confused by your installer giving up due to not finding something in an index, instead gives you "the last best attempt" and that documents that its EOL'd.

And that way when you search for it on CPAN, the results you get clearly say "DEPRECATED" as soon as you get anywhere near it.

Will go file a bug on b.g.o now. Thanks =)