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

Re: Rebuild status of FE5 (Was: Re: Please rebuild your packages in the development tree of Fedora Extras)

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 26.02.2006, 20:21 +0100 schrieb Aurelien Bompard:
So, how to proceed? Bug the maintainers with a E-Mail directly? Probably
a good idea. I'll try to write a script that does this.
This is the best idea at the moment IMHO.[...]
Anyway, a direct mail reminder will probably help a lot.

Done some minutes ago (sorry, I didn't find time for it earlier);
Initial results:

Keith G. Robertson-Turner: "This account is protected against spam,
using the SpamArrest service, which is a 'C/R' or 'Challenge/Response'
service. [...]"
/me wonders if Keith was wise enough to whitelist the E-Mail address
used by bugzilla.redhat.com. Keith?
aaron.bennett_AT_olin.edu -- "Delivery failed."
colin_AT_fedoraproject.org --  "User unknown"
lemenkov newmail ru -- "User unknown"

I say if they didn't bother to keep a working email in owners.list orphan the bunch _right_ _now_, then we still have a small window for people to pick up the broken pieces.




/me wonders how many of the other mail addresses from owners.list don't
work but chooses to simply ignore that for now.

Someone could write a ping scripts which sends messages on be halve of say you? And then send mails to all listed addresses, with a content telling the maintainers to ignore it. Then you would get all failures and would know.

And I suspect that some others from those 43 maintainers probably should
face that they have a lot of other, more important work to do and should
probably orphan their packages so that other interested people can take
them over.
Maybe automatically orphan the packages if they are not rebuilt for the 6th
of Mars ? (date of "Absolute devel freeze")?

Opinions on that?

auto orphan is a bit harsh, but maybe a bit harsh is just what we need?
I would not want to auto orphan packages where people have given a reason why they aren't rebuilded yet.

Suggestions how to solve this whole mess in the short and in the long
term welcome.
Having not-rebuilt packages being automatically orphaned on test3 of each FC
release seems like a decent long-term solution to me.

And opinions on this one? We would also need to force a rebuild of all
noarch packages to to make this work efficient. And I suspect that a lot
of people don't like that or a "rebuild everything in Extras for each
Core release".

I agree, including non-arch packages. We really want a rebuild each FC release, because of newer compilers, maybe api but not abi compatible deps etc. And this would nicely shake out all not activly maintained packages.

The real question however is not when to orphan that we'll figure out. but what todo with packages that stay orphaned for a long period?



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