Rebuild status of FE5 (Was: Re: Please rebuild your packages in the development tree of Fedora Extras)

[Hans de Goede]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 26.02.2006, 20:21 +0100 schrieb Aurelien Bompard:
>> [...]
>>> So, how to proceed? Bug the maintainers with a E-Mail directly? Probably
>>> a good idea. I'll try to write a script that does this.
>> This is the best idea at the moment IMHO.[...]
>> Anyway, a direct mail reminder will probably help a lot.
> 
> Done some minutes ago (sorry, I didn't find time for it earlier);
> Initial results:
> 
> Keith G. Robertson-Turner: "This account is protected against spam,
> using the SpamArrest service, which is a 'C/R' or 'Challenge/Response'
> service. [...]" 
> 
> /me wonders if Keith was wise enough to whitelist the E-Mail address
> used by bugzilla.redhat.com. Keith? 
> 
> aaron.bennett_AT_olin.edu -- "Delivery failed."
> colin_AT_fedoraproject.org --  "User unknown"
> lemenkov at newmail.ru -- "User unknown"
> 

I say if they didn't bother to keep a working email in owners.list 
orphan the bunch _right_ _now_, then we still have a small window for 
people to pick up the broken pieces.

> :-((
> 
> :-((
> 
Agreed.

> /me wonders how many of the other mail addresses from owners.list don't
> work but chooses to simply ignore that for now.
> 

Someone could write a ping scripts which sends messages on be halve of 
say you? And then send mails to all listed addresses, with a content 
telling the maintainers to ignore it. Then you would get all failures 
and would know.


>> [...]
>>> And I suspect that some others from those 43 maintainers probably should
>>> face that they have a lot of other, more important work to do and should
>>> probably orphan their packages so that other interested people can take
>>> them over.
>> Maybe automatically orphan the packages if they are not rebuilt for the 6th
>> of Mars ? (date of "Absolute devel freeze")?
> 
> Opinions on that?
> 

auto orphan is a bit harsh, but maybe a bit harsh is just what we need?
I would not want to auto orphan packages where people have given a 
reason why they aren't rebuilded yet.

>>> Suggestions how to solve this whole mess in the short and in the long
>>> term welcome.
>> Having not-rebuilt packages being automatically orphaned on test3 of each FC
>> release seems like a decent long-term solution to me.
> 
> And opinions on this one? We would also need to force a rebuild of all
> noarch packages to to make this work efficient. And I suspect that a lot
> of people don't like that or a "rebuild everything in Extras for each
> Core release".
> 

I agree, including non-arch packages. We really want a rebuild each FC 
release, because of newer compilers, maybe api but not abi compatible 
deps etc. And this would nicely shake out all not activly maintained 
packages.

The real question however is not when to orphan that we'll figure out. 
but what todo with packages that stay orphaned for a long period?

Regards,

Hans