Hi
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:08 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
We dont want QA community members testers/reporters/triagers ( and general end users ) wasting their contributed time reporting bugs that wont get fixed.
On 01/23/2014 03:55 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
That's not necessarily bad. And by categorizing those bugs separately, it> >So, one possibility would be to move less-maintained packages to a separate>That wont reduce the bugs reported against it...
> >repository tree still included as Fedora and enabled by default
would be easier to treat them differently.
Who is we?
Just because upstream is inactive doesn't mean that there are bugs and just because upstream is inactive doesn't mean package maintainers won't fix bug reports. Most such components don't receive any bug reports whatsoever because they are stable and work just fine for the niche users who need them. They don't add any real overhead to Fedora and cutting them will just piss off users without any benefits. As long as package maintainers are willing to maintain them, there is no reason to mess with the process. If we want to have a way to show that upstream is inactive, that is pretty reasonable thing to do.
Rahul
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
