On Nov 21, 2011, at 1:53 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: > On 11/21/2011 09:25 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> Unconvincing. To "reassure ownership" periodicially won't be sufficient. >> It would be just another button to click (like FAS password or cert >> renewal) and would not guarantee that the packages would be maintained >> properly and that tickets would be dealt with. A "sign of life" from a >> person does not imply that the person's packages are (well-)maintained. >> > > Well if people want more controversial proposal of sign of live that's > relatively easier to accomplish. > > Revoke that maintainers package privileges for $next-release if he does > not respond to bug reports in timely manner in GA releases and orphan > his package. > > Arguable a bit drasting but at the same time far more effective clean up > process. > >>>> I cant image how much resources across the project have been spent on >>>> packages that no longer are being actively maintained but have not been >>>> removed from the distribution. >> Might be true. I agree with your concerns, just not with how you'd >> like to tackle the problem.;) > > I think the "soft" approach will still be more efficient then current > implemented solution. > > The "hard" approach would certainly be the most efficient one and at the > same time teach packager/maintainers a thing or two against their > responsibility towards the community and least but not least towards our > end user base and arguably it might be doing the relevant maintainers a > favour as in they have not realised or have not come in terms with the > fact that they no longer have the time to maintain their package(s) and > that approach would serve as a bit of a wakeup call but as I mention > some people might find that a bit of an harsh approach to the problem. > > I'm all ears for any solutions to the task at hand that you might have > up your sleeve. > > JBG This has come up nearly every release cycle. Problem is that nobody can seem to agree on what an appropriate "sign of life" would be, no has made a serious FESCo proposal for a contrived sign of life. I don't think anybody disagrees (well maybe KKoffler) that unmaintained software should be discovered and ejected from the distro, the entirety of the problem lies how to discover (as well as side issues about what to do about maintainers that are active for one package, but completely ignore 3 others, etc…) So if you are serious about wanting this fixed, draft a proposal, figure out who's going to do the coding work, and bring it to FESCo. - jlk -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
