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

Re: Remove orphans in devel (Was: Re: atitvout + gai-pal : Orphaned dependencies!)

Am Montag, den 15.05.2006, 17:19 +0200 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> On Mon, 15 May 2006 16:27:22 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > moving this to Fedora Extras list -- this seems like the better place
> > for such discussions to me
> My message was a notification (also see its Cc line), not the start of a
> discussion.

Exactly -- my message was meant as start of a discussion and that's why
I move it to this list, that seemed like the better place. 

> > Am Montag, den 15.05.2006, 12:44 +0200 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages
> > > 
> > > The packages
> > > 
> > >   lrmi 
> > >   xosd
> > > 
> > > are on the list of orphaned packages. [...]
> > 
> > Well, why don't we remove them from devel if the situation doesn't
> > change in the next 5 days?
> That would be unnecessarily rude if done deliberately. These two orphans
> are requirements of maintained packages. So, now that it is known that
> they are orphaned, there is the opportunity to pick them up.

Well, we can extend the timeframe a bit to (for example) two or four
weeks. But IMHO removing them after that timeframe is better then
removing them shortly before FC6 is launched.

> > Wasn't that the plan that was proposed
> > shortly before FC5 was final when we tried to clean up everything a bit?
> See CVS commit traffic. Some more packages have been orphaned and have
> gone unnoticed. Even more packages have been orphaned in April.

Well, maintaining two lists manually (e.g. one in the wiki and one in
owners.list) seems problematic to me in the longer term. We should try
to find a unified solution.

And btw, it seems we need a proper "orphan policy". Anyone interested in
working one out?
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora leemhuis info>

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