On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch(a)dell.com> wrote:
> Note that I am not advocating keeping these packages unfixed. I
> to point out that things might turn ugly and might even trigger an
> avalanche when you remove the FTBFS packages from the repo and then
> the packages that depend on them will start to cry.
skvidal pointed out repoquery --tree-whatrequires can help us find the
whole affected set of packages. I'm looking at generating that list
now. If we include all ~550 orphan packages in the run, plus the ~100
FTBFS packages, plus all packages that these depend on, I'm sure it'll
wind up being a long list. All the more reason to look _now_, and not
2 days before Alpha compose.
Not to over burden you with the FTBFS effort. But to help me best
prioritize my own time it would be great if you configure out a way
for me quickly find the FTBFS packages in the dep chain for the
packages I already co-maintain.
The current representative governing body of voices in my head are not
primarily an altruistic group. To get their resource allocation
approval it would help immensely if I could show them the specific
FTBFS packages that have a direct impact on my current workload.