Hi
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 01:00 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:Hey, I love that idea. Great metric.
> Even a simple list of packages ordered by the time from last
> non-mass-rebuild release multiplied by the number of currently open
> bugs would be quite useful. Packages with bug-years above 50 or so
> would be good candidates for inspection.
Agreed. It is atleast a metric that can be tweaked as opposed to pretending that all packages with inactive upstreams is a deep resource drain on Fedora. I would suggest that when we identify such packages, we take steps to try and get more maintainers for those packages first before trying to cull them off. For instance, sending a note to fedora announce list and here with the list of problematic packages. That way, everyone will have a fair chance to try and rescue the packages they care about.
Rahul
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct