On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:52:07 +0100 bugs.michael@xxxxxxx (Michael Schwendt) wrote: > On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:10:31 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > paul at all-the-johnsons dot co dot uk gconvert > > > > I was meaning to remove this from the owners.list file... > > I will do so soon unless someone speaks up. > > Well, removing packages from owners.list (and renaming packages in > owners.list) so far has not removed them from bugzilla. It needs an > administrator to do that, IIRC. :( Thats anoying. Do we know how many package names are in that situation? Is there someone that can remove the ones that should really be gone? > > IMO, this bears the risk that the list of "Component"s in bugzilla > is filled with package names that are not in the distribution. Sure, but that's what we have already, right? > And where packages are renamed, users may still submit bug reports > using out-of-date component names in bugzilla. Yeah. I wish bugzilla had some kind of alias setup... if someone files a bug against a re-named package it should file against the new component name. For packages that are totally dropped, perhaps something could be rigged to file against a 'dropped package' component... I don't know that it has any such ability however. ;( > My suggestion is to keep owners.list as is until there is a package > database for proper tracking of renames and removals. I guess so. In this case gconvert never existed... so I can't imagine why anyone would file a bug against it, but removing it from the owners.list won't matter much apparently. ;( > Alternatively, also contact the bugzilla admin to remove the unused > component entry. Whats the best way to do that? Ticket in the otrs? kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
