[ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

[Adam Williamson]

On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 20:43 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:

> Then you have misunderstood it, unfortunately. I'm not against EOL ticket
> cleanup procedures in general. I'm against closing tickets repeatedly
> after it has been shown that an issue is still present in the current dist
> and nobody has proven the opposite. Especially, if a problem is due to a
> packaging issue in a specific package (and that has been pointed out
> explicitly), a bug zapper could notice that the package has not been
> modified (beyond automated rebuilds) and _cannot_ fix the issue.

Ah, sorry: the ones I clicked from your post did not have such comments,
so I thought you were just complaining about cleanups in general.

What's needed to be sure the bug doesn't get closed is for the Version
field to be bumped to a release that's not going EOL. A comment may do
the job, but there's usually hundreds of bugs in the list to be EOLed
and it's usually a single person compiling the EOL list; they don't have
time to inspect _every_ ticket manually (the weeding is more along the
lines of 'look through the summary list for bugs that look like they may
be special cases').
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net