On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:08:12PM +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 08:49 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > A little while ago we have received the request on the infra issue > > tracker to > > remove all maintainers of retired packages [1]. > > > > So today I decided to look at what this would look like and wrote a > > script that > > queries PDC for the list of all branches on all projects [2], gather > > from it a > > list of all the packages that are retired on all their branches (so > > all branches > > are ``active=false``). > > For each of these retired project, it queries dist-git to find out if > > they still > > have maintainers in addition to the ``orphan`` user. > > > > The outcome of this script can be found there: > > > > > > https://pingou.fedorapeople.org/retired_packages_with_maintainers.log > > > > > > Some stats about this: > > - 881 RPM packages are retired and still have maintainers (out of > > 4322 retired > > RPMs). > > - 662 of them are not orphaned > > - 42 modules are retired and still have maintainers (out of 42 > > retired modules). > > - all of them are not orphaned > > - 2 containers are retired and still have maintainers (out of 3 > > retired > > containers). > > - all of them are not orphaned > > > > Which brings a couple of questions: > > - Do we have a documented way to mark modules as orphaned or retired? > > Not really, usually this requires releng ticket which most of people > don't ever create. > > > - Should we orphan all the RPM packages that are retired but not > > orphaned? > > Doesn't that mean that we will add them back to repos? For me retired > means that they are not in repos anymore, so what would orphaning > exactly mean? Or is this just about marking it as "orphaned-retired" in > dist-git? To pick an example: denyhosts still has Jason as POC while all its branches are set as "active=False" in PDC. So by orphaning the package, I mean setting the "orphan" user as POC for it. > > Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all > > maintainers > > of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > I think this is good idea to remove all maintainers from retired > packages because they essentially can't do anything with them anyway. > > But beware of EPEL-only packages. The script checks *all* branches in PDC and ensure that they are all "active=False". So if a package still has active branches in EPEL it should not show in the list here. Pierre _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
