RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy

Hans de Goede j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl
Sat Apr 15 07:43:18 UTC 2006

Patrice Dumas wrote:
>> A few problems need to be discussed and solved:
>>  * When a release of Fedora Core becomes legacy, not seldomly a Fedora
>> Extras package maintainer moves on to the current or latest release of
>> Fedora Core and stops preparing/testing/publishing updates for the legacy
>> versions. Since not every package maintainer would "support" old legacy
>> branches, we need a way to mark individual package branches as "free for
>> adoption by Fedora Extras Legacy". With this comes the need to monitor
> Maybe, before adoption by fedora extras legacy team, it should be possible
> to have a possibility for individual contributors that are interested
> in older branches of the project to take over maintainance of the older
> branches. This could simply achieved by saying so to the maintainer of
> the active branches and adding oneself to the owners.list to get the bugs
> for that package, import the cvs package and work only on the old branches.

+1 (yes thats all I have to say).

>> corresponding bugzilla tickets of specific branches. It may be necessary
>> to give legacy branches of Fedora Extras a new "Product" name in bugzilla,
>> so a default package owner can be different compared with the primary
>> owner for active releases.
> I don't think it is really needed in many cases, unless the primary owner 
> don't want to get the bugs of the older releases. As long as he doesn't 
> have to fix them I think he won't mind receiving the bug reports. I am 
> more for a comaintainership with verbal agreement on who do what.

+1 (yes thats all I have to say).



More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list