Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 14:13, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > > - Do we have a documented way to mark modules as orphaned or retired? > > I think we do. I seem to remember seeing "dead.module" files in some > module repositories I looked at ... Well, the "dead.package" file in dist git has been the standard way to mark packages as retired. "fedpkg retire DESCRIPTION" adds it, too, and _without_ marking the package as orphaned anywhere. ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 9:14 AM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:51:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all > > > maintainers > > > of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > > > If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all branches are retired or > > EOL" than yes, this is a good thing. However, not sure if worth spending > > energy on. What are the benefits over status quo? > > Someone asked us to look into this, so I did, briefly. > I am also very happy to close the ticket as "Won't fix" and move on :) I think we should orphan the packages, for couple of reasons: 1. It's easier to find orphaned packages compared to retired packages 2. When we unretire, we will give the package to the requestor, but it might still leave the non-main maintainers (which I think is wrong?) I know you already mentioned - The script checks *all* branches in PDC and ensure that they are all "active=False", this is very important and please re-verify, as we dont want to orphan EPEL only packages as well as packages that are still being maintained in released branches but retired in rawhide. Thanks. > > > Pierre > ___ > 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 ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 16:19 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:13:42PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:51:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > > Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: > > > > "remove all maintainers > > > > of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > > > > > If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all branches are > > > retired or > > > EOL" than yes, this is a good thing. However, not sure if worth > > > spending > > > energy on. What are the benefits over status quo? > > > > Someone asked us to look into this, so I did, briefly. > > I am also very happy to close the ticket as "Won't fix" and move on > > :) > > I think it might be worth it... it makes it more clear how many > packages > someone maintains and what their status is. As someone who found himself in the list 3 times I would be very much in favor of removing myself as maintainer of these packages :) And since the script has already been written and it works, I would be in favor of deploying it somewhere where it runs periodically. Tadej ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:13:42PM +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:51:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > > Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all > > > maintainers > > > of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > > > If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all branches are retired or > > EOL" than yes, this is a good thing. However, not sure if worth spending > > energy on. What are the benefits over status quo? > > Someone asked us to look into this, so I did, briefly. > I am also very happy to close the ticket as "Won't fix" and move on :) I think it might be worth it... it makes it more clear how many packages someone maintains and what their status is. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
Dne 12. 05. 20 v 20:26 Vít Ondruch napsal(a): > Dne 12. 05. 20 v 14:51 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): >> On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >>> Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all >>> maintainers >>> of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? >> If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all branches are >> retired or EOL" than yes, this is a good thing. However, not sure if >> worth spending energy on. What are the benefits over status quo? >> > For example to be able to see if some packager is active or not? Why the > Pagure user page [1] should show that somebody maintains some package > while it is actually not true? In this specific case, there are listed 4 > EOL packages. Forget to mention, that this page is overview also for myself, if I should something let go. And also, since we have lost the ability to manage user privileges per branch, it is not possible to retire package and remove yourself from it, because then it would not be possible to maintain the stable branches. There should be other mechanism to remove the maintainers once the last branch gets EOL, but there is non AFAIK. Vít > > If you think it is not worth spending the time to provide the correct > information, then maybe this whole page should be removed from Pagure, > because it has no value ATM. > > > > [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/skottler/projects > > ___ > 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 ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
Dne 12. 05. 20 v 14:51 Miro Hrončok napsal(a): > On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >> Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all >> maintainers >> of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all branches are > retired or EOL" than yes, this is a good thing. However, not sure if > worth spending energy on. What are the benefits over status quo? > For example to be able to see if some packager is active or not? Why the Pagure user page [1] should show that somebody maintains some package while it is actually not true? In this specific case, there are listed 4 EOL packages. If you think it is not worth spending the time to provide the correct information, then maybe this whole page should be removed from Pagure, because it has no value ATM. [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/skottler/projects ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:51:03PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all > > maintainers > > of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all branches are retired or > EOL" than yes, this is a good thing. However, not sure if worth spending > energy on. What are the benefits over status quo? Someone asked us to look into this, so I did, briefly. I am also very happy to close the ticket as "Won't fix" and move on :) Pierre ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On 12. 05. 20 8:49, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all maintainers of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? If the procedure is "remove all maintainers if all branches are retired or EOL" than yes, this is a good thing. However, not sure if worth spending energy on. What are the benefits over status quo? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:08:12PM +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 08:49 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > A little while ago we have received the request on the infra issue > > tracker to > > remove all maintainers of retired packages [1]. > > > > So today I decided to look at what this would look like and wrote a > > script that > > queries PDC for the list of all branches on all projects [2], gather > > from it a > > list of all the packages that are retired on all their branches (so > > all branches > > are ``active=false``). > > For each of these retired project, it queries dist-git to find out if > > they still > > have maintainers in addition to the ``orphan`` user. > > > > The outcome of this script can be found there: > > > > > > https://pingou.fedorapeople.org/retired_packages_with_maintainers.log > > > > > > Some stats about this: > > - 881 RPM packages are retired and still have maintainers (out of > > 4322 retired > > RPMs). > > - 662 of them are not orphaned > > - 42 modules are retired and still have maintainers (out of 42 > > retired modules). > > - all of them are not orphaned > > - 2 containers are retired and still have maintainers (out of 3 > > retired > > containers). > > - all of them are not orphaned > > > > Which brings a couple of questions: > > - Do we have a documented way to mark modules as orphaned or retired? > > Not really, usually this requires releng ticket which most of people > don't ever create. > > > - Should we orphan all the RPM packages that are retired but not > > orphaned? > > Doesn't that mean that we will add them back to repos? For me retired > means that they are not in repos anymore, so what would orphaning > exactly mean? Or is this just about marking it as "orphaned-retired" in > dist-git? To pick an example: denyhosts still has Jason as POC while all its branches are set as "active=False" in PDC. So by orphaning the package, I mean setting the "orphan" user as POC for it. > > Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all > > maintainers > > of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? > > I think this is good idea to remove all maintainers from retired > packages because they essentially can't do anything with them anyway. > > But beware of EPEL-only packages. The script checks *all* branches in PDC and ensure that they are all "active=False". So if a package still has active branches in EPEL it should not show in the list here. Pierre ___ 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:03 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Good Morning Everyone, > > A little while ago we have received the request on the infra issue tracker to > remove all maintainers of retired packages [1]. > > So today I decided to look at what this would look like and wrote a script > that > queries PDC for the list of all branches on all projects [2], gather from it a > list of all the packages that are retired on all their branches (so all > branches > are ``active=false``). > For each of these retired project, it queries dist-git to find out if they > still > have maintainers in addition to the ``orphan`` user. Hey pingou, I've been wondering about the same thing a while back. > - Do we have a documented way to mark modules as orphaned or retired? I think we do. I seem to remember seeing "dead.module" files in some module repositories I looked at ... > - Should we orphan all the RPM packages that are retired but not orphaned? I think removing maintainers from packages where all branches are inactive is a good idea. Those only add noise when querying anything, in my experience. I'd support an automatic / scripted procedure to remove all maintainers from all-branches-retired packages, if you decide to bring this to FESCo :) So long as we make sure that if any branch is still not retired we don't modify the maintainer list, I'm all for it. 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
Re: Retired packages with maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 08:49 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Good Morning Everyone, > > A little while ago we have received the request on the infra issue > tracker to > remove all maintainers of retired packages [1]. > > So today I decided to look at what this would look like and wrote a > script that > queries PDC for the list of all branches on all projects [2], gather > from it a > list of all the packages that are retired on all their branches (so > all branches > are ``active=false``). > For each of these retired project, it queries dist-git to find out if > they still > have maintainers in addition to the ``orphan`` user. > > The outcome of this script can be found there: > > > https://pingou.fedorapeople.org/retired_packages_with_maintainers.log > > > Some stats about this: > - 881 RPM packages are retired and still have maintainers (out of > 4322 retired > RPMs). > - 662 of them are not orphaned > - 42 modules are retired and still have maintainers (out of 42 > retired modules). > - all of them are not orphaned > - 2 containers are retired and still have maintainers (out of 3 > retired > containers). > - all of them are not orphaned > > Which brings a couple of questions: > - Do we have a documented way to mark modules as orphaned or retired? Not really, usually this requires releng ticket which most of people don't ever create. > - Should we orphan all the RPM packages that are retired but not > orphaned? Doesn't that mean that we will add them back to repos? For me retired means that they are not in repos anymore, so what would orphaning exactly mean? Or is this just about marking it as "orphaned-retired" in dist-git? > Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all > maintainers > of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? I think this is good idea to remove all maintainers from retired packages because they essentially can't do anything with them anyway. But beware of EPEL-only packages. > > Thanks for your inputs, > > Pierre > > > [1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8600 > [2] https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/extras/active_branches.json (8+Mb > file) > ___ > devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to > devel-announce-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-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org - -- Igor Raits -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEcwgJ58gsbV5f5dMcEV1auJxcHh4FAl66kawACgkQEV1auJxc Hh6Z4A/+P6Ihd/JDAVT940mdtO5ajMBCDCLnh1pRoluxIqAejSTX39zzTekbzGBJ KDmKhwiBmrEuPFHxbTuTAFZmxYnuNOey0AT2EHuO3EZ0VFQafaTiMvM5fEB5a1G7 PHFTNeKloXzi21KtB6SOuHuKxEo0NySjb7ZRlLppp/QKbiYApgQ9smiHYPX6dHLX f04+X7Fjx0WFXvSpqgnHCjyNajRH3I70riulHj0VQ0904aWc3Ou9dyGezFtUXKph 11NXn2KWs56ixbjwiW4X3EcXGFVgoGD8+ZIYq6MJBdHiI5F87oiJ0YK+Q0JQsymR T/fTXo/7di2t529XGU/4AOFD89iDWMwHmgwDMSZvD8bRJAMuxB3OmRcrLZE5dIe2 kp9hLOp4iXBX4kFy2lEAdW4hch933OD8Pad4lGhKDLWusAgOOZuHAvwc4nbQaEiu KaUTSiARnajm5WXj0hJLcS2mtNCgDMis3tW+Vk8LYn8u3pbO53YkyZiYWoOs1ued JaD7waOix8GYDsM002NA5RR6shCJQQKz1Eow6I3eY1rmWw6bpQPGco1Yoli7GDgt RKc3KjuZOHFPfkXLaqVI8/rx7Mg4PkwEyXtJ+OY0arsM2LpvXaYjgGfe+pkDvndE 10Dk9rc/w6yc1o+EotUcTm/2hZPlxd9BUOaYWr0kftJvqjysOnc= =YyUb -END PGP 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
Retired packages with maintainers
Good Morning Everyone, A little while ago we have received the request on the infra issue tracker to remove all maintainers of retired packages [1]. So today I decided to look at what this would look like and wrote a script that queries PDC for the list of all branches on all projects [2], gather from it a list of all the packages that are retired on all their branches (so all branches are ``active=false``). For each of these retired project, it queries dist-git to find out if they still have maintainers in addition to the ``orphan`` user. The outcome of this script can be found there: https://pingou.fedorapeople.org/retired_packages_with_maintainers.log Some stats about this: - 881 RPM packages are retired and still have maintainers (out of 4322 retired RPMs). - 662 of them are not orphaned - 42 modules are retired and still have maintainers (out of 42 retired modules). - all of them are not orphaned - 2 containers are retired and still have maintainers (out of 3 retired containers). - all of them are not orphaned Which brings a couple of questions: - Do we have a documented way to mark modules as orphaned or retired? - Should we orphan all the RPM packages that are retired but not orphaned? Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all maintainers of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? Thanks for your inputs, Pierre [1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8600 [2] https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/extras/active_branches.json (8+Mb file) ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ 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
Retired packages with maintainers
Good Morning Everyone, A little while ago we have received the request on the infra issue tracker to remove all maintainers of retired packages [1]. So today I decided to look at what this would look like and wrote a script that queries PDC for the list of all branches on all projects [2], gather from it a list of all the packages that are retired on all their branches (so all branches are ``active=false``). For each of these retired project, it queries dist-git to find out if they still have maintainers in addition to the ``orphan`` user. The outcome of this script can be found there: https://pingou.fedorapeople.org/retired_packages_with_maintainers.log Some stats about this: - 881 RPM packages are retired and still have maintainers (out of 4322 retired RPMs). - 662 of them are not orphaned - 42 modules are retired and still have maintainers (out of 42 retired modules). - all of them are not orphaned - 2 containers are retired and still have maintainers (out of 3 retired containers). - all of them are not orphaned Which brings a couple of questions: - Do we have a documented way to mark modules as orphaned or retired? - Should we orphan all the RPM packages that are retired but not orphaned? Finally, does everyone agree about the original request: "remove all maintainers of retired packages"? Or should we bring this to FESCo? Thanks for your inputs, Pierre [1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8600 [2] https://pdc.fedoraproject.org/extras/active_branches.json (8+Mb file) ___ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-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-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org
