incoming: dependency warnings

[Jeff Spaleta]

On 7/14/05, Jens Petersen <petersen at redhat.com> wrote:
> Would it be better to send it out as a separate mail from the daily
> rawhide report?  Either that or perhaps restrict the deps report in
> the daily rawhide mail to a single arch during the early part of the devel
> cycle?  Currently it seems more to be bloating the daily rawhide mail
> IMHO and a lot of the broken deps are duplicated across archs anyway.

What about looking into re-organizing the output so that dep problems
that exist across all arches show up in a common block, then after
that dep specific variations show up? Would that solve most of the
issues you have with the report bloat? It's to early to tell for sure,
but having the information available in the report sure has seemed to
cut down on the avalanche of mailinglist posts about the same broken
tree deps from people eating rawhide. I'd hate to turn off ppc and
x86-64 from the report and encourage people to start posting
redundantly again asking for other to confirm arch specific dep
problems.

Is the script that generates that report open for review and patching?
'someone' might be able to patch the script to produce a common block
of dep problems to bloat if this approach is worth attempting.

-jef