Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

[Jesse Keating]

On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 10:59 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> You know we have a procedure for this it is called the awol maintainer
> procedure and it would be nice if FESco would follow its on procedures
> here.
> 
> Ah well I guess the rules don't apply to those who make them :(
> 
> 

The non-responsive maintainer process is a rather lengthy and involved
process, one which wouldn't lead to these packages being blocked in
time.  Due to that we decided it would be best to special case these and
orphan them right away, so that this current set of packages can be
dealt with appropriately.

If a volunteer wishes to instigate a non-responsive process on all the
maintainers, that is a separate matter which can happen concurrently to
the current actions.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100116/8ebe1d6e/attachment.bin