FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-27-2010, 03:56 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 15:46 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 01:17:28PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:00:50AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > > The following 30 packages, with respective FTBFS bugs, have been open
> > > since the Fedora 11 time frame, and continue to fail to build. These
> > > are the oldest non-building packages in the distribution, everything
> > > else (over 8800) managed to build for Fedora 12 or newer already.
> >
> > At today's FESCo meeting, it was agreed that all the below packages
> > would be marked orphan. I know several of these have been fixed by
> > provenpackagers already - you are welcome to un-orphan and maintain
> > them going forward, or the original package owner may choose to do so.
>
> Why were the packages only orphaned for devel and not all supported
> branches? It is kind of strange to have a new maintainer only for devel,
> but not for the other branches as the qtiplot case shows.
>

It was easier to just do devel, and that's the only place a package
would be blocked if these don't get owners. For the packages that do
get owners, we can free up whichever branches the new maintainer wishes,
which may not be all of them.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-27-2010, 04:39 PM
Kevin Fenzi
 
Default Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:43:40 +0100
Till Maas <opensource@till.name> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 02:42:58PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 20:52:12 +0100
> > Till Maas <opensource@till.name> wrote:
> >
> > > The list of packages you announced that are going to be orphaned
> > > and the list of packages that were orphaned are not the same.
> > > recordmydesktop was on the to-be-orphaned list but afaics was not
> > > orphaned and also was not mentioned in your list about which
> > > provenpackager fixed which package.
> >
> > Odd. Not sure why it wasn't there.
> >
> > I mailed the maintainer and can orphan it.
>
> It is still not orphaned afaics.

Sorry about that, was hoping I would get a reply.

Orphaned in devel.

If someone wants to pick it up in other branches just let me know.

kevin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-27-2010, 04:55 PM
Till Maas
 
Default Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:39:38AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:43:40 +0100
> Till Maas <opensource@till.name> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 02:42:58PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > > On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 20:52:12 +0100
> > > Till Maas <opensource@till.name> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The list of packages you announced that are going to be orphaned
> > > > and the list of packages that were orphaned are not the same.
> > > > recordmydesktop was on the to-be-orphaned list but afaics was not
> > > > orphaned and also was not mentioned in your list about which
> > > > provenpackager fixed which package.
> > >
> > > Odd. Not sure why it wasn't there.
> > >
> > > I mailed the maintainer and can orphan it.
> >
> > It is still not orphaned afaics.
>
> Sorry about that, was hoping I would get a reply.

Oh, then I misunderstood, I thought you got a reply saying that you can
orphan it. I will then go on with a non responsive maintainer procedure.

Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-28-2010, 09:14 AM
Till Maas
 
Default Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 08:56:30AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:

> It was easier to just do devel, and that's the only place a package
> would be blocked if these don't get owners. For the packages that do
> get owners, we can free up whichever branches the new maintainer wishes,
> which may not be all of them.

But then the package appears to be still maintained in the stable
branches in PkgDB, if they are only orphaned/blocked/retired in devel.
This is something that may normally happen, e.g. when a package is
obsoleted by another package.

Nevertheless, what is the recommended procedure to claim the other
branches? Is it a ticket to FESCo trac or a CVS Admin procedure request?

Regards
Till
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 01-28-2010, 04:40 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 11:14 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> Nevertheless, what is the recommended procedure to claim the other
> branches? Is it a ticket to FESCo trac or a CVS Admin procedure
> request?

Honestly that's a good question. I'd start with a FESCo ticket and see
what happens?

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:19 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org