Housekeeping (Was Re: FE Package Status of Sep 4, 2006)

[Wart]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 28 Packages not present in the development repo
> -> most of them probably should be marked as dead.package in cvs. If
> they get re-submitted later they should go though a full review again.

Be careful with this.  Some of these packages were recently built, but 
didn't make it to the repo in time for the report (wfut, for example)

> 3 packages which have not yet been FE-APPROVED
> -> heck, why?

#189375 (Maelstrom) moved from Core to Extras quite a while ago, and per 
the owner's request is now undergoing a formal review.  There's a minor 
licensing question that has been pushed upstream and we're waiting for a 
response.

--Mike