On 04/06/2025 12:39, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 12:24:15PM +0100, Ahmad Khalifa wrote:
Separately, may I also suggest some kind of timeout on the RFH bugs?
(oldest is about to turn 20 yo)
Why?
If the team no longer wants help, they should just close it.
If the package was orphaned since then, ideally it should be closed, sure.
Because they're misleading and waste contributor time.
Have you spent time going through a lot of the 50 RFH bugs?
They're full of spam and people being ignored.
If the maintainer truly still needs help, they can raise another bug,
it's super easy by email :)
PS, similarly with RFP/ITP? (oldest RFP is about to turn 24!)
We should just abolish and forbid RFPs, but in the current state having
old open RFPs works as designed IMO, saying that someone at some time in
the past wanted this software packaged for some reason.
For ITPs, we should indeed close ones that didn't have activity for some
specific period of time, or turn them into RFPs, and that's already
implemented in the bartm's scripts, though I'm not sure if it's
currently enabled or not.
They're both useful within a "recent" time span (say 6m or 1y).
After that, why keep it and have a long wnpp page that's not useful?
Debbugs will have a record of archived ones for future historians.
--
Regards,
Ahmad
