rawhide perl-5.12 status

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 07/08/2010 05:05 AM, Iain Arnell wrote:
> 2010/7/7 Ralf Corsepius<rc040203 at freenet.de>:
>> On 07/07/2010 03:21 PM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
>>> After I gained so much popularity on fedora-devel, I have no courage to
>>> ask rel-eng for another
>>> favour like "remove package, which is not mine". But surely ping
>>> maintainers
>>> to orphan/kill these packages in week or two would be nice.
>>>
>> They all are being pinged daily - All of these packages are included
>> inside of the broken deps reports.
>>
>>> I suppose packages, which won't be fixed, have: A/ dead upstream, B/
>>> no-one is using them. Therefore I agree with removal.
>> Well, these packages all carry broken deps and are uninstallable in rawhide.
>>
>> I.e. unless they can be fixed, it's only a matter of whether _we_ kill
>> them or whether rel-eng/FTBS will kill them later.
>
> But do we have the authority (either individually, or collectively as
> the SIG) to arbitrarily kill off broken packages?
IMO, yes. What FTBS or rel-eng would have to do later in the release 
cycle is not any different what we would have to do.

> I suspect it may be
> necessary to initiate the nonresponsive maintainer process.

Good question.

IMO, we will either have to go through:
a) 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers

b) Or simply apply
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/PackageEndOfLife

FTBS/rel-eng will certainly apply b), and I don't see much reasons for 
not applying b) either.


BTW: We are talking about 4 packages, involving these 3 maintainers:

perl-DBI-Dumper: Chris Weyl
perl-Data-Alias: Chris Weyl
perl-Pugs-Compiler: Steven Pritchard.
perl-Test-AutoBuild: Daniel Berrange

I haven't seen a trace of Steve for several months, but Chris and Daniel 
are still around in Fedora. No idea, why they prefer not to respond on 
these cases.

I'd really prefer them to handle their package's issues themselves. 
Unfortunately, this so far hasn't happened.

Ralf