Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-18

[Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Robinson (pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx) said: 
> >> That list seems seriously incomplete.  I'm aware of at least these
> >> others that have FTBFS in both F17 and F18 mass rebuilds, as evidenced
> >> by their release tags:
> >
> > It's done by basing off of the F16FTBFS bug, as that's the easiest source
> > of info when we haven't done a mass rebuild.
> >
> > We could include everything with older dist tags. Looking at it, that would
> > be 78 more packages.
> 
> It would be nice to get rid of anything that's FTBFS in non supported
> Fedora (ie at least < fc16) and the last time I looked at that there's
> a good 150 odd packages that are fc15 or older packages. There's been
> two mass rebuilds since then and if the package maintainers haven't
> managed to fix them (or they've not been fixed by people like
> secondary arches that fix them because they're blocking their builds)
> the package maintainer is either AWOL or not doing their job of
> maintaining packages or even bothering to check failure emails so it's
> likely better off for Fedora that they're scrapped as well. I think in
> the F17 cycle I fixed over 100+ of these packages.

I'm OK with being more thorough here, but I can't commit to bringing back
the full FTBFS infrastructure myself - I just don't have the time.

I'll see about getting the list of other non-building packages and get
bugs filed for them.

Bill
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel