Hi
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 01:00 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > Even a simple list of packages ordered by the time from last > > non-mass-rebuild release multiplied by the number of currently open > > bugs would be quite useful. Packages with bug-years above 50 or so > > would be good candidates for inspection. > > Hey, I love that idea. Great metric. > Agreed. It is atleast a metric that can be tweaked as opposed to pretending that all packages with inactive upstreams is a deep resource drain on Fedora. I would suggest that when we identify such packages, we take steps to try and get more maintainers for those packages first before trying to cull them off. For instance, sending a note to fedora announce list and here with the list of problematic packages. That way, everyone will have a fair chance to try and rescue the packages they care about. Rahul
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
