Il giorno dom, 05/01/2020 alle 12.21 +0100, Miro Hrončok ha scritto:
On 03. 01. 20 19:24, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > The dep was provided by non-ntk, which got retired about half a
> > year
> > ago [1] after FTBFSing since F29 [2].
>
> <SARCASM>Isn't it great</SARCASM> when the policy designed to
> remove
> breakage from the distribution actually CREATES breakage? Retiring
> packages
> with no regards to their reverse dependencies is just broken. It
> had never
> been done that way in the past, before Miro's recent crackdown,
> because it
> simply defeats all common sense.
As a matter of fact, the policy was changed recently, so depending
package
maintainers MUST get notifications. The Fedora 31 round was
unfortunate, mostly
because nobody got properly notified. I have devoted a great amount
of energy
and time to make it better for next rounds. I hope it worked. Only
couple of
packages are to be retired, where the maintainers simply don't care
anymore with
only one dependent package:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedora...
For the F31 crackdown - it's not like a retired package cannot ever
be
unretired. It has been more than 8 weeks now, but I gladly re-review
a package
that got retired, if new maintainers pop up. Unlike you, I actually
believe
packages must be maintained in order to be kept.
I'm working for unretiring non-ntk, I think I can file a new review
request in one week, as soon as I come back home; I'm already working
on it.
The solution is not to stop orphaning/retiring FTBFS packages, the
solution is
to get "broken deps" notifications working again:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
Ciao
Guido
FAS: tartina