On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:13:47 -0800, AW (Adam) wrote: > On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 19:16 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:55:14 -0600, BWI (Bruno) wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:56:39 -0600, BWI (Bruno) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Orphan xmms-pulse > > > > > > > > > > Since I actually use xmms, I'm taking xmms-pulse. > > > > > > > > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-January/161136.html > > > > > > Thanks for the heads up. I checked for bugs before picking it up and > > > didn't see any. > > > > They are hidden under the carpet: > > > > http://tinyurl.com/84z7rlv > > > > That happens when bug-zapper scripts close tickets without anyone paying > > attention at all. :-( > > There are no scripts involved, The bugzilla account called "Bug Zapper" is a human-being not a script? Unbelievable. > and we do pay attention. Where? How? It may be true that some bug zapper human-beings care about a few components, but none of them have paid attention with regard to XMMS. The script has started a loop of "warning to close, then closing" the tickets, and it required somebody else to pay attention. Examples, and there are more like these: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/459206 2008-08-14 opened 2008-11-25 confirmed (by me even) 2009-06-09 warning by EOL bugzapper script ... 2010-04-27 warning by EOL bugzapper script 2010-06-28 CLOSED by EOL bugzapper script ... 2011-07-25 finally fixed by Tom Callaway https://bugzilla.redhat.com/434692 2008-02-24 opened 2008-09-12 a non-helpful response by the packager 2008-11-25 confirmed (by me even) 2008-11-26 warning by EOL bugzapper script ... 2009-06-09 warning by EOL bugzapper script 2010-06-28 CLOSED by EOL bugzapper script ... 2011-07-25 finally fixed by Tom Callaway So, after three years, Tom has taken over the packages to keep them alive a bit. > The policy is > perfectly clear: bugs in old releases get closed because we don't > support old releases. > > The fact that no-one's filed those bugs against newer releases rather > strongly indicates that either a) they're not happening any more or b) > no-one cares any more (possibly, no-one uses xmms any more). At least 'c)' is missing as a catch-all, Adam. c) In fact, I've reopened/updated several tickets related to xmms* a few times, but this has not helped at all because the packages in Fedora have not been in a state one could call "maintained". Packages require someone who listens in bugzilla. Your 'a)' is wishful-thinking. It is true for some bugs, but I specifically referred to issues in xmms* packages. And with 'b)', you're making it too easy. At least the packager ought to use the self-packaged software from time to time. There have been some very obvious problems in them. I understand there may be no bug zappers with interest in XMMS. I don't use it either anymore, but I still learn about Fedora users who use it because it is being offered, and some Audacious users continue to draw comparisons with XMMS and also ask about problems with it, so occasionally I've had a brief look. It is nothing but annoying what happens in tickets like that. Fedora users complain about tickets that are handled like that. Worse are those tickets where nobody but the Bug Zapper script is active. You should be thankful for every user, who updates/reopens a ticket, but users won't do that too often, if it turns into a fight against a script that automatically closes tickets. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
