On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 09:49 +0100, Paul wrote: > Hi, > > > I also think that "a maintainer isn't answering their bugs, not answering > > rebuild requests, emails or the like" opens a bit too much for interpretation. > > It also has a problem. I've been out of things for about 10 days, which > means that I have an anjuta bug which is over 2 weeks old. I'm also > waiting on an upstream response for a bug problem, so it's slow going. > The bug is still being worked on, but hasn't been fixed. Easy to indicate in a bug report, hence showing that you are not AWOL. > > You also have the problem of folks being on holiday. It's not unusual in > the UK for people to vanish for 2 - 3 weeks. We have a vacation page in the wiki. That should be checked first. > > Some bugs are also much bigger than first thought. z88dk on 64 bit being > one such example. It is still being worked on, but the problem is that > the code generated isn't happy fully, so it's not in a state that I > would want to see released. Also easy to indicate in a bug report. > > > In my opinion it should be only serious issues that allows AWOL procedure. > > Like security bug, big usability bug, broken dependency, or a need to rebuild > > against newer library version. I don't think it would be right to allow > > people to bug maintainers for minor/wrong issues and then start the AWOL > > procedure. > > The AWOL problem is not a trivial one. A while back, I posted something > similar to Mike's proposal to the f-extras list - the main problem > identified was that it is hard to fix time limits on things (though the > thread may have been on orphaned packages). Yes, fixed time limits are hard to do. I had a situation a while ago were 2 weeks would not have been enough, so I would suggest something a bit longer. josh -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
