On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:42:00AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > This is not about nagging maintainer for the purpose of nagging them. > Filing the requests en mass is exactly nagging for nagging. But
> I feel exhausted seeing again and again packages which are very likely > broken, if the package is broken, then file a bug. That's a completely different case. > serving no purpose. That's a strong assertion. I hope that you know that a non-existance is not getting proved by claiming "I think there is none". But again, if you don't like the package, file a bug with the explanation why you think it should be removed. > I feel exhausted seeing that these packages pull in dependency chains which > are not possible to be updated or removed due to them. > If you need to update the dendency, then update the dependency and report a bug against the then broken package. See openssl package for an example. All I want to say that these issues should be handled case by case. There should be a reason for each of them and the bug report should be tailored to that case. But pushing the work of a responsible bug report from the reporter to the assignee is wrong. -- Petr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected]
