Hi, On 01/15/2010 09:01 PM, Till Maas wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 01:17:28PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:00:50AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >>> The following 30 packages, with respective FTBFS bugs, have been open >>> since the Fedora 11 time frame, and continue to fail to build. These >>> are the oldest non-building packages in the distribution, everything >>> else (over 8800) managed to build for Fedora 12 or newer already. >> >> At today's FESCo meeting, it was agreed that all the below packages >> would be marked orphan. I know several of these have been fixed by >> provenpackagers already - you are welcome to un-orphan and maintain >> them going forward, or the original package owner may choose to do so. > > What about the other packages of these maintainers? E.g. in the > recordmydesktop case, there were four bugs open with working patches > attached for that package. I did not yet check the other packages, but > in case a packager does not have the time anymore to maintain one > package from this list, why do we assume that he has the time to > maintain the others? > So before the mass orphaning is done, it would be nice to do it in a way > that allows to at least easily spot which maintainers owned the packages > before the orphage, so non responsive maintainers can be found easier. > Or tell all maintainers in question and orphan all their packages. But > the current solution seems to be only half-baked. > You know we have a procedure for this it is called the awol maintainer procedure and it would be nice if FESco would follow its on procedures here. Ah well I guess the rules don't apply to those who make them :( Regards, Hans > Regards > Till > -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel