Dne 3.3.2017 v 06:51 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a): > On 03/02/2017 01:43 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> On 03/01/2017 09:23 PM, opensource@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>> >>>> The following packages are orphaned and will be retired when they >>>> are orphaned for six weeks, unless someone adopts them. If you know >>>> for >>>> sure >>>> that the package should be retired, please do so now with a proper >>>> reason: >>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_remove_a_package_at_end_of_life >>> >>> >>> Is there a way to request a package owned by somebody else to be >>> retired? >>> >>> I am asking, because during the recent mass rebuilt, a larger number >>> packages have been rebuilt, whose maintainers are known to have left >>> Fedora >>> or apparently do not seem/do not seem to be able to care about their >>> packages. >> >> We have nothing in place other than to start the non-active maintainer >> process for all of them. > > Unfortunately, this doesn't cover the case of > "IMHO package X should be removed, because I believe it's > obsolete/dead/outdated/insecure whatever, but I am not in position > and/or not knowledgeable on details to decide". > > > A real world example, I just encountered this situation, is this: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1424024 > > - Maintainer apparently is inactive in Fedora since 2015-06-22 > (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/userinfo?userID=819) > > - No maintainer activity on package since 2013 (fc20). > All builds since fc20 were performed by releng/provenpackagers. > > - Package F26FTBFSes > (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=11868) > Trigger for the F26FTBFS is -Werror, but the real issue underneath is > openssl-1.1.0 incompatibility. As a short term "work-around/easy-fix", > it is possible to resort to building against compat-openssl10, but in > longer terms, a port to openssl-1.1.0 would be required. > > > Would a tracking bug in RHBZ "nominees for package removal", which > would be assigned to FESCO be helpful? > Wasn't there rule to remove packages after two failed mass rebuilds? Vít _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
