On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Tomas Mraz wrote: > On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 14:04 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: >> >> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Tomas Mraz wrote: >> >>> I think there should be at least two conditions which would have to be >>> fulfilled for the nagging bug to be created - the package was not >>> touched by the maintainer during recent x months and at least one bug is >>> opened not closed in the bugzilla on the package. >>> >> >> I disagree about the bug being open. A lack of filed bugs could mean that >> no one CARES about the pkg at all. And if we have pkgs which are not being >> maintained AND no one cares enough to file a bug about then either they >> are: >> >> 1. extraordinarily stable >> 2. dead upstreams >> 3. unmaintained >> 4. unusued >> >> in ANY of those cases I'd want to start thinking about nuking the pkg from >> fedora. > > So that means that for example for the openoffice.org-dict-cs_CZ package > I'll get the nag bug report before each and every Fedora release? > > It is definitely not 4. however 1. and 2. apply to it. As this is just a > czech spelling and hyphenation dictionary which is pretty good one and > we do not have any alternative anyway I do not think that 2. matters > much. > > OK, I think my next changelog entry in the .spec will be something > like: > - rebuilding just for the sake of not getting a nonsense bug report > opened against the package Really? We need all this drama? I have another radical idea - we could whitelist all sorts of things which are unchanging and yet used. We could act like reasonable folks and realize that one extra bug report A YEAR that you have to close as 'fixed' is really not that big of a deal. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
