Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

[Till Maas]

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 01:17:28PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:00:50AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > The following 30 packages, with respective FTBFS bugs, have been open
> > since the Fedora 11 time frame, and continue to fail to build.  These
> > are the oldest non-building packages in the distribution, everything
> > else (over 8800) managed to build for Fedora 12 or newer already.
> 
> At today's FESCo meeting, it was agreed that all the below packages
> would be marked orphan.  I know several of these have been fixed by
> provenpackagers already - you are welcome to un-orphan and maintain
> them going forward, or the original package owner may choose to do so.

What about the other packages of these maintainers? E.g. in the
recordmydesktop case, there were four bugs open with working patches
attached for that package. I did not yet check the other packages, but
in case a packager does not have the time anymore to maintain one
package from this list, why do we assume that he has the time to
maintain the others?
So before the mass orphaning is done, it would be nice to do it in a way
that allows to at least easily spot which maintainers owned the packages
before the orphage, so non responsive maintainers can be found easier.
Or tell all maintainers in question and orphan all their packages. But
the current solution seems to be only half-baked.

Regards
Till
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100115/1b6afc0f/attachment-0001.bin