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

Re: Summary - Broken dependencies in Fedora Extras - 2006-11-24



Ralf Corsepius schrieb:
> On Sat, 2006-11-25 at 17:42 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Michael Schwendt schrieb:
>>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 07:48:31 -0800, Christopher Stone wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> There needs to be a way to
>>>> blacklist these packages from showing up in the report or else send
>>>> them to another interested party such as fedora-legacy
>>> I've suggested a black-list several times before without clear
>>> feedback. Black-listing packages is like hiding something under the
>>> carpet. 
>> Agreed, until now I don't see any good reason for a blacklist.
> How about FESCO implementing some rules on "taking consequences" from
> EVR issues in FE not being taken care about?

Sounds like a good idea -- but you don't have to wait for FESCo -- the
Committee has a lot of stuff to do already and the members to the work
in their spare time, too.

Someone inside or outside of FESCo that cares about this particular
problem could just work out a detailed plan what to do. Then FESCo will
probably simply ACK it and say "thanks for your help.

> E.g. "broken deps > 4weeks", and the package will be automatically
> orphaned plus the maintainer's account will be withdrawn/canceled?

I agree with Gianluca: That's a bit overkill. But yes, something in that
direction.

CU
thl


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