On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 12:31:22 +0100, James wrote: > Remember that some packages get very little activity because they need > very little. And these are not a problem at all. > Increasing someone's AWOLness counter because they didn't for example, > update ed is just plain silly. [snipped the rest here] Uh, come on, ... that's not helpful. There are ideas how to detect absent maintainers early by collecting and *combining* information available in the Fedora intrastructure. Not by having a single old stable pkg trigger an AWOL alarm. So far: A package can have dozens of unresponded tickets in bugzilla (with perhaps all of them not having been looked at), a new upstream release made a year ago, a maintainer who has dropped of Fedora and hasn't renewed certs for half a year, ... and nobody would notice. Provenpackagers would apply hot-fixes in Rawhide for FTBFS issues. Once somebody discovers that the package is an orphan, starting the non-responsive maintainer procedure wouldn't be much of a big deal. What's 3-4 weeks compared with N months? Though, repeatedly the packagers (sometimes new ones who would join Fedora for a single pkg), who would like to take over an orphan, have pointed out that they consider the procedure tedious and a pain (and I understand that failed attempts at contacting a person is no fun). Especially if a pkg has been in a poor state for N months anyway even in the stable dist releases. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
