kazehakase removed from Lucid?

Asked by Bela Lubkin on 2010-05-03

<https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kazehakase> shows "kazehakase" as currently supported and present in Karmic and earlier releases. I installed it somewhen between Lucid Alpha-1 and Beta.

Now that my Lucid is synced up to release (x86_32), it shows up in Synaptic under the "local and obsolete" category. `apt-get install --reinstall kazehakase` reports:

   Reinstallation of kazehakase is not possible, it cannot be downloaded.

Kazehakase development appears to be ongoing at <http://kazehakase.sourceforge.jp>. Ubuntu's kazehakase seems to be in a somewhat strange state in that only the WebKit back-end appears to work, while the main project seems primarily focused on Gecko. But anyway.

If kazehakase has been intentionally removed from Ubuntu, how / where should I have learned so (and how it was decided), from the launchpad pages on the package?



Question information

English Edit question
Ubuntu kazehakase Edit question
No assignee Edit question
Last query:
Last reply:
Bela Lubkin (filbo) said : #1

Ok, by googling "kazehakase lucid" I found LP #553686 which requested (and effected) removal of kazehakase. I'm trying to better understand how I should have more easily figured this out via Launchpad itself.

Regarding the action itself, it seems like kazehakase should have been moved into a less supported area (universe or multiverse?) without actually deleting it. I see the security concerns etc.; but Ubuntu's repositories contain many thousand apps which are unlikely to be ultimately secure. It's the nature of the beast (i.e. any large OS + apps repository).

3rd string apps exist, it seems to me, to provide strong choice to the users. They should not be, and generally are not presented as the "right" way to do XYZ; in packaging / installer terms this means that they aren't shown as dependencies of anything the Ubuntu project cares about more than the item in question. That's all good.

What is the harm of having kazehakase as a 3rd string browser choice like so many others -- conkeror, fennec, seamonkey, arora, midori, rekonq, chimera2, dooble, netsurf, etc.? [Please don't read this as an invitation to exterminate them! ;-} I'm a bit of a browser collector. Currently have this funky 2-D menu of (i) gecko-based, (ii) webkit-based, (iii) other-graphic, (iv) text-based browsers -- 26 entries including 2ea for link2 & w3m -- graphical and non. I bounce around between them exploring differences of rendering & behavior, they're not just sitting there.]

Can you help with this problem?

Provide an answer of your own, or ask Bela Lubkin for more information if necessary.

To post a message you must log in.