On 01/19/2012 11:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
This is an important point: I think it would be much less of a problem
to retire packages if the process for unretiring them were not so
painful. I_do_ think the unretiring process is an excellent example of
unnecessary bureaucracy (as is the renaming process, good lord, what a
PITA). Those two things could stand to be trimmed down. At least to 'if
you're a provenpackager (or even just a sponsored packager) you can
unretire a package without any obstacles'.
I'm not so sure that the process is entirely to blame but probably to
some extent and as with everything could be improved but these comments
fell out of Dan's PrivateTmpfeature proposal which is just couple of
days old.
rgmanager is going away in 2/3 weeks from Fedora rawhide/F17.
ricci is going away from Fedora rawhide/F17 in 2/3 weeks time.
Now why if you know that you are going to orphan/remove components why
do you have to do so late in the development cycle why cant this stuff
be done immediately at branch time?
The first thing to do is to remove what's not going to be in
$next-release then proceed working on the stuff that actually will so
those of us that are actually working on features and other stuff ain't
wasting our time with something that will be removed *sometime* in the
midst of the development cycle...
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
