Re: Orphaned packages that will be retired (and everything will most likely burn)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On 15-02-19 12:51, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:11 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I will take sdljava as bolzplatz relies on it.

I do not know how / why this was orphaned. This package has
2 other admin's in the user/group settings. If this was done
automatically it would be nice if we could change the automatic
procedure to just make the next admin the main admin.

sdljava was orphaned by me, the previous owner. The reason is that I
am no longer interested in maintaining this package. I choose to
retain access to the package because I want to have ability to fix
important bugs in already released Fedora versions (28 and 29) without
having to obey the provenpackager policy.

If this was done manually it would be nice if whomever orphaned it
would have instead given it to one of the 2 other admins.

The standard operating procedure is clear - give package to the orphan
user and announce it on devel list so that anyone interested
(including comaintainers) can adopt orphaned package. This is exactly
what I did.

That may be the procedure, but you could have applied common-sense
and ask one of the 2 co-admins if you could give it to them, that
would have short-circuited the need for having to go through releng,
so less work for all people involved.

Anyways as I already said I think the procedure needs to be updated
to explicitly ask the person doing the orphaning to contact co-maintainers
before orphaning if there are co-maintainers.

While brainstorming about improving the procedure I believe it
should also include doing:

sudo dnf repoquery --whatrequires <packagename)

And then contact maintainers of resulting packages about this.

This means asking some extra work from the orphaner, but we are
all members of the same community and I believe a simple courtesy
like this to fellow community members when orphaning packages
is important.

I've filed a ticket with FESCo asking to look at improving the
orphan procedure, because lately we seem to be seeing a lot of
unnecessary orphaning leading to needless churn:
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2091

Regards,

Hans
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux