On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 11:08 PM Miro Hrončok <mhron...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Oh but they are different. FTBFS are not urgent and the policy is only set > to > retire packages that FTBFS for more than 2 release cycles. > > For a package to be considered for retirement in February 23, it would > have to > fail to build: > > - During the Fedora 36 mass rebuild in January 22. > - During the Fedora 37 mass rebuild in July 22. > - During the Fedora 38 mass rebuild in January 23. > > That is not urgent, that is "not being fixed". > > We can make this even longer, but I don't think it'll make a difference -- > eventually we will just get a list of packages that aren't beign fixed, > but for > a longer time. > No, please don't make it longer. I think it's fine as is. If it's any longer then we get packages that cannot be built from source at all, not even on F36 in this example, and this can lead to very bad situations if some urgent reason comes up to rebuild them. -- Kalev
_______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
