On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 07:57:43PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 03:11:53PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > (a) The reason for wanting packages to be retired so quickly has not > > been made clear by rel-eng. > > Miloslav explained this nicely. > > > (b) The biggest reason for people to use one distro over another is > > based on number of packages available to be installed. By retiring > > packages more quickly we inevitably reduce this number thereby making > > Fedora less popular. > > One of the reasons to chose Fedora is also to be first. This is also not > true for orphaned packages nobody takes care of. Also since the package > will usually be retired up to six months later, I doubt that this really > makes an impact of why people chose Fedora. I don't understand the reference to "up to six months later" here. Can you explain how retirement is proposed to work precisely, with timescales. > > (d) 4 weeks is too short. Some people go on holiday for this long. > > If the process only happens once per week as I proposed, there is an > additional half week in average. There are additional 2 weeks in which > packages can be unretired without much effort. And even then it would be > easy to find a packager for a re-review if one asks here on the devel > list. And here, "unretired without much effort" means what exactly? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
