Hi,
On 22-09-2019 14:37, Till Hofmann wrote:
Hi all,
So I've just been notified that tolua++ has been retired, which is a dependency
of one of my packages (fawkes). BZ:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1736911
This would have been fine (as no action has been taken), if the automation had
actually followed the FTBFS guidelines [1]. But it hasn't, in many ways:
1. "If an FTBFS or FTI bug remains in the NEW state for at least 1 week, any concerned
party can set a NEEDINFO for the maintainer to respond and send an e-mail reminder with the
Bugzilla link to <component_name>-maintain...@fedoraproject.org, cc’ing the devel mailing
list (so there is a public record) and commenting on the bug about doing so."
I did not see such an email on devel. Also NEEDINFO was set on Sep 22, ~10
weeks after retirement.
2. "If the bug remains in NEW state for at least another 4 weeks after the second
e-mail and comment (= at least 8 weeks in total), the package will be orphaned. Orphaning
can be requested via a releng issue."
There was no email at all, at least not to devel, or the maintainers of the
dependencies of tolua++.
3. "The normal Orphaned package that needs new maintainers procedure will be
followed for the packages orphaned in this way, leading to their retirement if nobody
adopts them."
This did not happen either. In particular, it was never announced that the
package was orphaned.
4. In fact, as far as I can tell, the package was never orphaned, but directly
retired.
To put it differently, the guidelines were completely ignored. The package was
retired 6 days after the initial FTBFS bug, without any announcement. This is
in stark contrast to the 14 weeks mentioned in the guidelines. To add to this,
the retirement isn't even mentioned in the bug report. It just silently
happened.
The comment "your package has not been built successfully in 31. Action is required
from you" isn't helping either, as the package has long been retired at that time.
I understand and support that FTBFS packages are retired, but this is not the
way this should work. There was no way I could have heard about the issue in
time. It effectively requires me to become co-maintainer on every package that
I depend on. Clearly not something I want to do.
So can we please make sure that guidelines apply to everybody, also and
especially to scripts?
I've no opinion on whether the process was followed correctly here (I did not
look closely
at that part of this email).
But I do have something to say about the specific example used. tolua++ being
retired
is not a problem for fawkes, as fawkes depends on compat-tolua++, which is
maintained
by me and has NOT been retired.
Regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
