On Monday 26 February 2007, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Ralf Corsepius (rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > > Check how FE has handled this: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/AWOL_Maintainers > > > > I don't see why this should not be applicable in future. > > > > One problem however: The ACLs prevent volunteers from stepping in and to > > take over rsp. to remove a package. > > Sure, that's how to *obtain* ownership if you desire it, and Toshio > has mentioned in this thread how he'd like to make that step easy. > > What I'm concerned about is packages remaining orphaned long-term, > because either no one wants to maintain them, or not maintain > them more than a rebuild for depedencies, etc. That's not really > covered here. During the FE preparations for FC6 [1], we pruned packages which were known to be orphaned from the repositories unless they got unorphaned in timely manner. I think this would be a good strategy to apply by default before every release, but perhaps earlier than was done in the above case, eg. somewhere between test2 and test3. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/FC6MassRebuild -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
