----- Original Message ----- > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2019 12:42:02 PM > Subject: Re: Let's revisit the FTBFS policy > > On 15. 08. 19 12:06, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > At the end, if somebody cares about such cases, it should not be hard to > > discover and act upon them, i.e. bugging the maintainer, fixing them, > > taking over the maintenance etc. > > This part is problematic. Because it requires human action that can be seen > as > toxic by some.
Only if they're present to notice. In the end, they're late and it was fixed for them, or at least someone cares for their work, so they should be... grateful? > > > According to compose report from 20190811 , I guess it was ~570 > > packages. How many of them had associated FTBFS BZs in "ASSIGNED" state > > and for which version of Fedora? This would be interesting statistics to > > know. My guess is that it was 100 BZs at most, but probably much lower > > number. > > "for which version of Fedora" doesn't apply really. Most of the bugs were > just > "rawhide" since the latest rawhide -> 30 only happened partially. > > The status data should be visible in Bugzilla, however no idea how to query > them > grammatically: > > - get CLOSED EOL bugzillas blocking the F30FTBFS tracker This should be it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_id=1674516&bug_id_type=anddependson&bug_status=CLOSED&list_id=10414793&query_format=advanced&resolution=EOL > - fetch their previous state > (this is visible in the bug, but no idea how to query it) Sorry, I have no idea for this one. > > -- > Miro Hrončok > -- > Phone: +420777974800 > IRC: mhroncok Regards, -- Pavel Valena Software Engineer, Red Hat Brno, Czech Republic _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.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://email@example.com