> orphaned = no maintainer > dropped/retired = no maintainer and unmaintainable I don't see a clear distinction. For me both are orphaned. In the second case it will require more work for a potential maintainer, or maybe the potential maintainer won't push it to devel/newer fc versions, but I don't understand why there is a need to make 2 separate cases? > If a package has a maintainer and is unmaintainable, then that's the > packagers problem to resolve. Sure, but a way to resolve it could be to say: I don't push that package to the devel branch. This should also be marked somewhere. But this may not be what you are talking about. > I am wanting to make it clearer which packages are orphaned, which ones > have been dropped/retired and clearly defining how a package gets a > dropped/retired status. You mean that you would like to distinguish among orphaned package some that are broken and should also be removed from previous releases, where they exist as binary packages, and so remove the binary packages from repo? -- Pat -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
