RFC: drop FTBFS packages? (was: Re: Massrebuild status)

[Andrea Musuruane]

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis
<fedora at leemhuis.info> wrote:
>>> Here is a list of packages that sill haven't been rebuild:

Adding maintainers below.

>> 502     2009-04-07      2009-04-07      snes9x      matthias...rpmforge.net
>> 503     2009-04-07      2009-04-07      raine         lxtnow...gmail.com
>> 505     2009-04-07      2009-04-07      sidplay      triad...df.lth.se
>> 508     2009-04-07      2009-04-07      streamri    lxtnow...gmail.com
>> 510     2009-04-07      2009-04-07      subtitle     lxtnow...gmail.com (subtitleripper? there is no package called subtitle)
>> 514     2009-04-07      2009-04-07      streamdvd lxtnow...gmail.com
>> 516     2009-04-07      2009-04-07      flvtool2      matthias...rpmforge.net
>> 519     2009-04-07      2009-04-11      vdr-mp3    felix...fetzig.org
>> [...]
>>>
>>> Just to point out the obvious: A few bugs are five days
>>
>> (19 days now)
>>>
>>> old and the maintainer didn't even replied yet.

Adding them in CC.

>> I'd wondering if we in should drop the packages from the devel repo that
>> remain unfixed in one or two weeks from now; of course we would need to
>> announce that in the bug report a few days before we actually do it. And
>> we'd need to check if the packages we drop are needed by other packages
>> in the repo.
>>
>> Options?
>
> Nobody? Should I take that as agreement or disagreement to "let's drop what
> doesn't build anymore" idea?

I think we should open bugs in bugzilla for these and then follow the
standard "Non Responsive Maintainers" policy that Fedora has:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy/NonResponsiveMaintainers

Bye,

Andrea.