On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 11:42:10 +0100, Mark wrote: > >> ProvenPackagers are there precisely to do what it looks like happened > >> with : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=8618 > > > > Wait a minute, it's not that easy. Provenpackagers are not supposed to > > jump in every N months, apply a fix, but leave a package unmaintained > > for the rest of the time. Such a package should become an orphan and be > > assigned to a new maintainer. > > Yes, but they are supposed to fix significant issue like Perl packages > which FTBFS after a PERL version update They _may_ fix those packages (it's described in the Wiki *when* a fix may be considered important), but what kind of fix they apply may be subject to prior discussion. Some types of packages may be trivial to fix with/without a version upgrade. For other packages a version upgrade could result in further "significant issues". Something a dedicated maintainer would need to take care of and not just an arbitrary provenpackager, who happens to notice "issues" after N weeks/months. > if the maintainer doesn't. The important thing to find out would be why "the maintainer doesn't" fix issues, which are considered "significant." > Or long standing bugs with NO comments from the developers. Which *could* imply that the package is unmaintained. Not always, because tickets could be useless, but somebody to look into it would be good. Currently, at dist end-of-life, valid bug reports are killed by scripts without anyone fixing the bugs. > Should they > also then kick off the orphaning process would be a question for FESCo It depends and is beyond the scope of this thread (because of a poorly chosen Subject line). -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
