perl-embperl mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Neil Gunton <>
Subject Re: Proposal to remove Embperl from Debian
Date Mon, 21 May 2018 19:13:09 GMT
Thanks, I am aware of the end of support for Wheezy. To be honest I have
been resisting upgrading because a) it tends to be very disruptive to a
production server for a live website that is used by lots of people (I
can't recall one major in-place upgrade that ever went smoothly, so
usually a complete re-install is needed), and b) I have been unnerved by
some of the debate I have seen about the move to systemd. I don't know
much about it myself, but I have heard from people who do seem to know
about it that it was quite controversial, to say the least. I don't like
monolithic systems that pull everything else in, and it seems like that
is the direction systemd is going in. I've been thinking about moving
over to Devuan, but I haven't checked on the status of that project in a
while. To be honest I have more pressing things to be worrying about
usually, and since Wheezy is very stable, it's been low on the list of
priorities to upgrade. If it works... also, I get the thing about
security upgrades, but I do have my box pretty well locked down in terms
of firewall rules, I disable most services that I don't use and I build
my own Apache from latest source, and MySQL is hidden behind the
firewall. I know stuff could come up with sendmail or bind, but you do
your best to keep up.



Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Well, your Debian Wheezy box will probably continue to run just fine with
> Embperl :)
> Seriously though, you should be aware that that release is nearly out
> of long-term support, and you should be planning an upgrade to Stretch
> - an excellent opportunity to reap the benefits of our continued attempts
> to keep things working and not be running a release without security
> support.
> As you say, it would be good to hear if there are any plans from anyone
> who can actively pursue maintenance of Embperl (which implies keeping it
> working on new perls) who has a stake in it - as there is, I think,
> noone from the Debian side in this position.
> Thanks for the feedback - it is appreciated.
> Best,
> Dominic.
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Neil Gunton wrote:
>> I am still actively using Embperl on my websites, fwiw. My main site is
>> the largest collection of bicycle tour journals in the world. I may not
>> show up in your statistics, but I just wanted to add one voice to the
>> "please keep it" side. I really like Embperl, it just works and has done
>> so for the last 18 years for me. I use Debian Wheezy currently, and my
>> systems don't tend to change much or very often. It's true that Embperl
>> isn't as actively developed as it used to be, but as with many things
>> Perl, it is still used by some people in systems that have been around
>> for a good long while, because they just do the job they are intended to
>> do and work well, so there's no need for constant churn. I would hope
>> that Gerald Richter and/or others would at least keep the package up to
>> date so it can continue to be included in Debian, because being taken
>> out completely seems like another step toward complete abandonment. If
>> it's not too much trouble to keep it in, I'd ask for that to happen. The
>> users might not be vocal or active in development of the package (I'm
>> not), but it is used and has been for a long time.
>> My website is called crazyguyonabike, it's that dot com if anyone's
>> interested. Not facebook by any means, but it's an active journaling
>> website and like I said the largest in the world for bicycle tour
>> journals. I'm also actively working on expansions to the site into other
>> topics, so this is not a dead issue for me. I plan on continuing to use
>> Embperl on new sites going forward.
>> Thanks for your consideration,
>> Neil Gunton
>> Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> As you can see from the message below, we are considering removing Embperl
>>> from Debian because of concerns about not being actively maintained. We
>>> have had to patch it several times to cope with changes in newer upstream
>>> versions over the past few years, and we don't think it is really being
>>> used much in Debian any more.
>>> Interested if anyone has any thoughts on this from the user or upstream
>>> dev perspective.
>>> Best,
>>> Dominic.
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Dominic Hargreaves <> -----
>>> Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:08:38 +0200
>>> From: Dominic Hargreaves <>
>>> To:
>>> Subject: Bug#899021: libembperl-perl: FTBFS with Perl 5.27, unmaintained
>>> 	upstream
>>> Reply-To: Dominic Hargreaves <>,
>>> Source: libembperl-perl
>>> Version: 2.5.0-11
>>> Severity: serious
>>> Justification: unmaintained upstream, and will shortly break in Debian
>>> X-Debbugs-Cc:
>>> User:
>>> Usertags: perl-5.28-transition hh2018
>>> The upstream version of this package has not worked since 5.18, and we
>>> have had to apply several fixes in Debian since. The build has now
>>> broken again with Perl 5.27:
>>> The problem in this case might not be that hard to fix, but I have
>>> been consisdering deprecating/removing this for some time, as there is
>>> a limit to how long we can be de facto upstream for this type of
>>> package.
>>> Currently the package has a popcon of inst: 37 / vote: 22 / recent: 1
>>> suggesting that it is barely used anywhere. So I suggest that rather than
>>> spending any more time maintaining it, we remove it from Debian.
>>> CC to debian-perl to get wider exposure of the proposal.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dominic.
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message