Remove devel/py-turbocheetah and devel/py-turbokid?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Remove devel/py-turbocheetah and devel/py-turbokid?

Kurt Mosiejczuk-9
Stumbled upon these while looking at updating py-cheetah.

py-turbokid is the one with a more recent release, with the last one being
January 2010. py-turbocheetah's last release was November 2007.

I can find no consumers. Is anyone actually using these?

The only updates to them seem to be updating the Makefile to reflect the
changes made to the infrastructure.

Do we want to delete them?

--Kurt

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove devel/py-turbocheetah and devel/py-turbokid?

Kurt Mosiejczuk-9
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 06:07:29PM -0400, Kurt Mosiejczuk wrote:
> Stumbled upon these while looking at updating py-cheetah.

> py-turbokid is the one with a more recent release, with the last one being
> January 2010. py-turbocheetah's last release was November 2007.

> I can find no consumers. Is anyone actually using these?

> The only updates to them seem to be updating the Makefile to reflect the
> changes made to the infrastructure.

> Do we want to delete them?

Alright, a better way to ask the question:

Does anyone want these two ports to stay in the tree?

--Kurt

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Remove devel/py-turbocheetah and devel/py-turbokid?

Daniel Jakots-6
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 23:19:43 -0400, Kurt Mosiejczuk <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 06:07:29PM -0400, Kurt Mosiejczuk wrote:
> > Stumbled upon these while looking at updating py-cheetah.  
>
> > py-turbokid is the one with a more recent release, with the last
> > one being January 2010. py-turbocheetah's last release was November
> > 2007.  
>
> > I can find no consumers. Is anyone actually using these?  
>
> > The only updates to them seem to be updating the Makefile to
> > reflect the changes made to the infrastructure.  
>
> > Do we want to delete them?  
>
> Alright, a better way to ask the question:
>
> Does anyone want these two ports to stay in the tree?

ok danj@ to remove them