Hi Alex,
I agree that in these cases an immediate orphaning of the packages is justified, as the
packager in question is clearly no longer active.
You might want to ask a provenpackager to push your fix directly to dist got though, to
get the changes in place in time.
Cheers,
Dan
On February 7, 2021 6:28:13 PM UTC, Alex Perez <aperez(a)alexperez.com> wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>I've opened
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2574
[
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2574] to facilitate assumption ownership of the Sugar
packages in Fedora, most of which are de-facto abandoned by the previous maintainer,
erikos, who has not authenticated with his FAS account since March of 2017, nearly three
years ago. I can't find a working e-mail address for him, and @chimosky and I are
trying to get the remaining core Sugar packages updated to the current version, before the
F34 freeze happens. Therefore, time is of the essence. The only two e-mail addresses I
could find for Simon were both aliases, simon(a)laptop.org [mailto:simon@laptop.org] and
simon(a)sugarlabs.org [mailto:simon@sugarlabs.org]. Both are no longer functional, nor have
they been for a couple of years.
>
>As an aside, I'd like to propose that FESCO consider revising the requirements to
simplify/expedite assumption of packages which have clearly been abandoned by their
previous maintainers. Perhaps "has not authenticated to FAS in 2+ years" could
be considered a form of abandonment? This subject seems worthy of discussion at the next
FESCO meeting.
> $ ./fedora_active_user.py --user erikos
>FAS username: aperezbios FAS password for aperezbios: Last login in FAS: erikos
2017-03-10 Last action on koji: Sun, 06 Dec 2020 tag_package_owners entry revoked by oscar
Last package update on bodhi: No activity found on bodhi