[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Summary from yesterdays FESCo-Meeting



Am Samstag, den 11.02.2006, 12:39 +0200 schrieb Ville Skyttä:
> On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 11:21 +0100, Dan Horák wrote:
> > >  Still unsure (Comments please!): 
> > >   * what do we do with packages where no maintainer steps up to request
> > > builds? Jeremy suggest "and when we get to FC5 - 2 weeks or so, we can
> > > step in for things that haven't been touch if needed". Or do we remove
> > > them and consider them orphaned if we don't hear *anything* from the
> > > maintainers after a bug was opened and nothing happened for one or two
> > > weeks? 
> > >   * Packages not rebuild before the 12th of February will be removed
> > > before FC5 is shipped to start with a clean tree with old cruft
> > > removed. 
> > 
> > Should not this be "Packages not rebuild after 12th of February will be
> > removed"? Because you plan to start the rebuild on the 12th.

Yes, of course, sorry for the that and the resulting confusion.

> Also, there are many noarch packages which don't benefit from a rebuild
> at all, so I think the above removal plan should be limited to
> non-noarch packages.

They IMHO should be rebuild because
- this way we notice that packagers are still alive and active (maybe
some packages are orphaned and we simply don't know about it yet).

- some noarch packages might not build anymore because foo or bar
changed in between (modular X.org for example). Yeah, maybe that's
unlikely, but we all know computers and linux well enough and know that
things like that happen.

Other opinions? 
-- 
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora leemhuis info>


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]