non-responsive maintainer: thomasvs

Wed Apr 7 13:27:45 UTC 2010

On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 08:53:10PM +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> W dniu 06.04.2010 15:56, Thomas Vander Stichele pisze:
> > On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 20:10 +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> it seems like thomasvs became unresponsive. I have filed a bug asking
> >> about python-twisted update [1] on 6th of February. It was then duped by
> >> a similar bug [2] on 23rd of March. I have also emailed Thomas on 26th
> >> of March. None of the queries met any response. Should I initiate the
> >> non-responsive maintainer process?
> > 
> > Hi Julian,
> > 
> > I'm still around, but a direct mail to me is the easiest way to get my
> > attention (as I suspect is the case for most developers).  I saw you did
> > two weeks ago asking about an update, but that's a different beast then
> > marking me as unresponsive :)
> > 
> > I think in general it would be good that when people want to initiate
> > the non-responsive maintainer process, they first of all mail the person
> > involved saying so.
> > 
> > For practical reasons contacting me over IRC doesn't always work since
> > I'm on three different machines regularly, and I only check bugzilla
> > stuff once a month relying on getting a mail or poke if something is
> > critical.
> > 
> > As for the issue at hand, Twisted is a complex beast to upgrade and
> > validate, so I sure could use help there! I see in the bug report you
> > made a list of current dependendants, we could divide them up and verify
> > them ?
> > 
> > Thomas
> > 
> Sorry if I acted to quickly, but the lack of response to my email made
> me afraid that you might be gone.
> Anyway, when it comes to the update, I'm happy to help. The total number
> of downstream packages dependent on twisted is 33. Should we expect
> breakage? Were there any API changes in twisted?
> I think we could start by dividing the list of the packages fifty-fifty,
> and check if they work at all. Then, I think it would be a good idea to
> bring maintainers into the loop since they actually know what the
> packages are supposed to do. The cleaned-up list follows below:
> 
> buildbot-0:0.7.12-1.fc12.noarch
> cnucnu-0:0-0.3.20100110.fc12.noarch
> desktopcouch-0:0.6.3-3.fc12.noarch
> elisa-base-0:0.5.35-2.fc12.noarch
> elisa-plugins-bad-0:0.5.35-2.fc12.noarch
> elisa-plugins-ugly-0:0.5.35-1.fc11.noarch
> entertainer-0:0.4.2-7.fc12.noarch
> flumotion-0:0.6.1-1.fc12.x86_64
> gadget-0:0.0.3-4.fc12.noarch
> itaka-0:0.2.2-1.fc12.noarch
> jabbim-0:0.5-0.12.svn20091030.fc12.noarch
> londonlaw-0:0.2.1-7.fc12.noarch
> nwsserver-0:2.0.0-1.fc12.noarch
> openxcap-0:1.1.2-1.fc12.noarch
> orbited-0:0.7.10-3.fc12.noarch
> poker-network-0:1.7.3-3.fc12.noarch
> postr-0:0.12.3-8.fc12.x86_64
> pyicq-t-0:0.8.1.5-5.fc12.noarch
> pyjigdo-0:0.4.0.1-2.fc12.noarch
> python-Coherence-0:0.6.4-1.fc12.noarch
> python-desktopcouch-0:0.6.3-3.fc12.noarch
> python-foolscap-0:0.4.2-3.fc12.noarch
> python-gnutls-0:1.1.9-1.fc12.x86_64
> python-morbid-0:0.8.7.3-1.fc12.noarch
> python-nevow-0:0.9.32-3.fc12.noarch
> python-pyrad-0:1.1-3.fc12.noarch
> python-sippy-0:1.0.1-1.fc12.noarch
> python-wokkel-0:0.6.3-1.fc12.noarch
> pyutil-0:1.6.1-4.fc12.noarch
> pywbem-0:0.7.0-3.fc12.noarch
> rhythmbox-upnp-0:0.12.5-8.fc12.x86_64
> supybot-0:0.83.4.1-2.fc12.noarch
> telepathy-sunshine-0:0.1.6-1.fc12.noarch

The python-mwlib package is dependent on twisted-core; will packages
like that one be affected too?

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
          Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com