Dne 27. 07. 23 v 11:46 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 6:25 PM Frank Dana <ferdnyc(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> 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?
I think the current order is fine. Because if I am not mistaken, should
I be listed in the PACKAGER section, I would also receive personal copy
of this email as an affected maintainer. Otherwise, looking at the
PACKAGE section is the right thing to do.
Vít
Fabio
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue