On Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 10:18 AM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Dear maintainers.
>
> Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages
> should be retired from Fedora 39 approximately one week before branching.
>
> 5 weekly reminders are required, hence the retirement will happen
> approximately in 2 weeks, i.e. around 2023-08-01.
>
> Policy:
>
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fai...
>
> The packages in rawhide were not successfully built at least since Fedora 36.
>
> This report is based on dist tags.
>
> Packages collected via:
>
https://github.com/hroncok/fedora-report-ftbfs-retirements/blob/master/ft...
>
> If you see a package that was built, please let me know.
> If you see a package that should be exempted from the process,
> please let me know and we can work together to get a FESCo approval for that.
>
> If you see a package that can be rebuilt, please do so.
Apologies if this has been discussed in the past, but...
Perhaps I'm unusual, perhaps not. But the way I typically consume any of Miro's
packaging reports is, I scroll down to the "affected (co-)maintainers" section,
look for my userid to see if there's anything I need to deal with urgently, and
then... Well, depends how much time I have. Sometimes, that's it. Other times, I look
over the rest of the mail to see if any packages of interest to me are listed. But I
always start by looking for my own name.
So, because the PACKAGER, rather than PACKAGE, names are actually the most important part
of the email (at least for me), I was wondering if it would make sense to list them second
or even first, rather than third / last?
I am doing something similar - mostly giving the list of packages a
glance, and then checking if I am marked as affected by anything.
So moving things around (1, 3, 2, in your numbering scheme) would help :)
Though with the Packager Dashboard listing "affected by orphaned
packages" data, this has become less important.
Maybe the "affected by long-term FTBFS" data could be integrated into
the Packager Dashboard as well?
Fabio