On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 10:12:07 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 16:30 -0500, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Author: mschwendt > > > > Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gtkglarea2/devel > > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2108/gtkglarea2/devel > > > > Modified Files: > > gtkglarea2.spec > > Log Message: > > Build disabled. Package is without maintainer. > > This package clearly provides evidence of why "orphaning packages" is > unnecessarily strict, and why adding additional states of package > maintainership are useful > (c.f. > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-March/msg00149.html) > > I have this package in a dep chain of a package I am using outside of > Fedora, and therefore had expressed my will to "have an eye on this > package" but am not interested in permanently maintaining this package. > > Apparently others (notably Gerard Milmeister, he recently seems to have > adapted the spec to FC5) are in a similar position. No, not a similar position. Gerard _depends_ on this package within FE (lablgtk). Which is why last night in the Wiki I moved this package from the list of "packages without maintainer" to "potentially orphaned packages". Note that I did not delete the binaries. However, owners.list does not reflect your (or Gerard's) interest in this package. > Here FESCo's policy of "strict maintainer<->package" apparently fails, > while collaborative, "keep package alive-maintainership" wouldn't be a > problem (gtkglarea2 is discontinued and stagnating for years, > nevertheless it still works and is being used). See above. Add yourself to CC in owners.list (provided that this feature still works or will be corrected if it is broken). -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
