Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

[Tomas Mraz]

On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 14:04 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: 
> 
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> 
> > I think there should be at least two conditions which would have to be
> > fulfilled for the nagging bug to be created - the package was not
> > touched by the maintainer during recent x months and at least one bug is
> > opened not closed in the bugzilla on the package.
> >
> 
> I disagree about the bug being open. A lack of filed bugs could mean that 
> no one CARES about the pkg at all. And if we have pkgs which are not being 
> maintained AND no one cares enough to file a bug about then either they 
> are:
> 
> 1. extraordinarily stable
> 2. dead upstreams
> 3. unmaintained
> 4. unusued
> 
> in ANY of those cases I'd want to start thinking about nuking the pkg from 
> fedora.

So that means that for example for the openoffice.org-dict-cs_CZ package
I'll get the nag bug report before each and every Fedora release?

It is definitely not 4. however 1. and 2. apply to it. As this is just a
czech spelling and hyphenation dictionary which is pretty good one and
we do not have any alternative anyway I do not think that 2. matters
much.

OK, I think my next changelog entry in the .spec will be something
like: 
- rebuilding just for the sake of not getting a nonsense bug report
  opened against the package

-- 
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
                                              Turkish proverb