Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-31 Thread Michael Schwendt
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:33:39 -0800, AW (Adam) wrote: On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 22:21 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: What's needed to be sure the bug doesn't get closed is for the Version field to be bumped to a release that's not going EOL. A comment may do the job, but there's usually

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-31 Thread Aleksandar Kurtakov
Isn't it time for v4 ? Alex - Original Message - From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 12:38:12 PM Subject: Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17 On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:33:39 -0800, AW (Adam

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-30 Thread Adam Williamson
On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 22:21 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: What's needed to be sure the bug doesn't get closed is for the Version field to be bumped to a release that's not going EOL. A comment may do the job, but there's usually hundreds of bugs in the list to be EOLed and it's usually a

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-30 Thread Adam Williamson
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 00:04 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: - for which nobody (neither the reporter nor the co-owners, nor anyone else) has bumped the Release: field as requested by the automated script One thing that bugs me here is that permissions on Bugzilla are somewhat tighter than I'd

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-29 Thread Michael Schwendt
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 09:23:19 -0800, AW (Adam) wrote: On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 20:43 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: Then you have misunderstood it, unfortunately. I'm not against EOL ticket cleanup procedures in general. I'm against closing tickets repeatedly after it has been shown that an

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-29 Thread Kevin Kofler
Michael Schwendt wrote: Or a keyword that would exclude the ticket from the compiled list automatically? If a second search on all tickets with that keyword results in hundreds or thousands of ticket numbers, that should raise an alarm-bell. If you set release to rawhide and add the

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-29 Thread Miloslav Trmač
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Michael Schwendt wrote: Or a keyword that would exclude the ticket from the compiled list automatically? If a second search on all tickets with that keyword results in hundreds or thousands of ticket numbers, that

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-27 Thread Michael Schwendt
On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:56:39 -0600, BWI (Bruno) wrote: Orphan xmms-pulse Since I actually use xmms, I'm taking xmms-pulse. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-January/161136.html -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-27 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:04:23 +0100, Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:56:39 -0600, BWI (Bruno) wrote: Orphan xmms-pulse Since I actually use xmms, I'm taking xmms-pulse. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-January/161136.html

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-27 Thread Adam Williamson
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 14:58 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: Orphan ccsm Orphan compiz Orphan compiz-bcop Orphan compiz-fusion-extras Orphan compiz-fusion-unsupported Orphan compiz-manager Orphan compizconfig-backend-gconf Orphan compizconfig-backend-kconfig4 Orphan compizconfig-python

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-27 Thread Kevin Kofler
Adam Williamson wrote: Just to note, in case anyone wondered, as I have something of a dog in the compiz fight: I did consider taking these but can't honestly commit to having enough time to maintain them decently. Since Canonical hired the main Compiz developer it does seem to be the case

[ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-26 Thread Bill Nottingham
Each release, before branching, we block currently orphaned packages. It's that time again for Fedora 17. New this go-round is that we are also blocking packages that have failed to build since before Fedora 15. The following packages are currently orphaned, or fail to build. If you have a need

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-26 Thread Jon Ciesla
Took libmodelfile and sage. -J -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-26 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 14:58:59 -0500, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote: If these packages are not claimed, they will be retired shortly before the mass branch for Fedora 17 on February 7th. Orphan xmms-pulse Since I actually use xmms, I'm taking xmms-pulse. -- devel mailing list

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED v3] Retiring packages for F-17

2012-01-26 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 02:58:59PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: Orphan techtalk-pse I have taken this. Currently it FTBFS because a critical dependency was dropped from Fedora, however I have patches upstream (not applied to git yet) which fix this. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization