Orphaning Candidate packages for removal due to FTBFS, implications

[Tomas Mraz]

On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 11:55 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: 
> On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 20:44 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > 
> > Imho the only real problem from your list is, if a package is
> > unmaintained, because if it is maintained, the maintainer usually uses
> > it, otherwise he would just drop it. If upstream is dead but the
> > maintainer fixes bugs, when they are found, I do not see a problem,
> > either. 
> 
> Often maintainers don't realize they have some of these packages, or the
> maintainers have left the project.
> 
> Even your most stable packages get touched nearly once a year due to
> distribution changes.  With a more active rpm upstream I suspect we'll
> be seeing even more need to rebuild everything, at least once a year.
> 
> In fact, if we were only checking once a year, I bet many of these
> packages are going to get hidden behind the mass rebuilder.

But these rebuilds are mostly automated ones by Fedora releng and as
such not countable against the nag bug report.
-- 
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
                                              Turkish proverb