On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 07:35:14 +1200, Michael J. Knox wrote: > So, my offering to unorphane Sodipodi seems to have raised a couple of > good questions. > > When should a package be removed and considered no longer maintainable? > > How long without a release till considered inactive? > > What lengths should someone go to, to confirm a project status? > > Why Orphane a package that is considered EOL? > > I know FE as it stands does not have a policy on this, perhaps its worth > knocking out some overall guidelines for the wiki? > > Thoughts? I'm afraid I misunderstand several of your questions. So, one by one: Package "sodipodi" has not been built since FC-3. It is not clear when exactly its original maintainer orphaned all his packages. However, he stopped working on sodipodi in favour of inkscape (which had started as a fork of sodipodi and has been more active/successful since then -- last release of sodipodi is over two years old). Every package in Fedora Extras, i.e. every package with binaries published in the repository, must have at least one maintainer listed in the owners.list file. So far, policies about orphans have been lax or non-existent as to give potential contributors the opportunity to evaluate orphans and pick them up more easily. However, I think the time has come to delete orphans from the repository more regularly and in accordance with a well-defined policy. Else the list of orphans will grow as we continue in "devel" and old orphans exist only in the old branches. I'm a proponent of the all-or-nothing strategy: orphaned binaries are deleted from all active (i.e. still supported branches). Once a new maintainer is found, he could update and publish new builds. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
