Dne 27. 07. 23 v 11:46 Fabio Valentini napsal(a):
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 6:25 PM Frank Dana <ferd...@gmail.com> wrote:On Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 10:18 AM Miro Hrončok <mhron...@redhat.com> wrote:Dear maintainers. Based on the current fail to build from source policy, the following packages should be retired from Fedora 39 approximately one week before branching. 5 weekly reminders are required, hence the retirement will happen approximately in 2 weeks, i.e. around 2023-08-01. Policy: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Fails_to_build_from_source_Fails_to_install/ The packages in rawhide were not successfully built at least since Fedora 36. This report is based on dist tags. Packages collected via: https://github.com/hroncok/fedora-report-ftbfs-retirements/blob/master/ftbfs-retirements.ipynb If you see a package that was built, please let me know. If you see a package that should be exempted from the process, please let me know and we can work together to get a FESCo approval for that. If you see a package that can be rebuilt, please do so.Apologies if this has been discussed in the past, but... Perhaps I'm unusual, perhaps not. But the way I typically consume any of Miro's packaging reports is, I scroll down to the "affected (co-)maintainers" section, look for my userid to see if there's anything I need to deal with urgently, and then... Well, depends how much time I have. Sometimes, that's it. Other times, I look over the rest of the mail to see if any packages of interest to me are listed. But I always start by looking for my own name. So, because the PACKAGER, rather than PACKAGE, names are actually the most important part of the email (at least for me), I was wondering if it would make sense to list them second or even first, rather than third / last?I am doing something similar - mostly giving the list of packages a glance, and then checking if I am marked as affected by anything. So moving things around (1, 3, 2, in your numbering scheme) would help :) Though with the Packager Dashboard listing "affected by orphaned packages" data, this has become less important. Maybe the "affected by long-term FTBFS" data could be integrated into the Packager Dashboard as well?
I think the current order is fine. Because if I am not mistaken, should I be listed in the PACKAGER section, I would also receive personal copy of this email as an affected maintainer. Otherwise, looking at the PACKAGE section is the right thing to do.
Vít
Fabio _______________________________________________ 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
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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
