Looking at the timeline, it seems you never claimed the master branch: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/mldonkey/timeline only f24 and f23.

Clicking on the 'Retired' status next to master on the right hand side of https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/mldonkey/ bring a pop-up saying: 2016-06-21: Retired orphaned package, because it was orphaned for more than six weeks.

That's for what lead to the current situation.

Looking at the timeline, it seems you never claimed the master branch: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/mldonkey/timeline only f24 and f23.

Clicking on the 'Retired' status next to master on the right hand side of https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/mldonkey/ bring a pop-up saying: 2016-06-21: Retired orphaned package, because it was orphaned for more than six weeks.

That's for what lead to the current situation.

Ok, well it was obviously a mistake... why would I take F24 and F23 if I hadn't also wanted to be able to first put the package out on rawhide. Can you please fix?

Ok, well it was obviously a mistake... why would I take F24 and F23 if I hadn't also wanted to be able to first put the package out on rawhide. Can you please fix?

And actually master should always be the last branch removed, and it shouldn't be allowed to be deleted if other branches exist. That seems like a bug to me.

And actually master should always be the last branch removed, and it shouldn't be allowed to be deleted if other branches exist. That seems like a bug to me.

thank you, it is unretired now.

thank you, it is unretired now.

And actually master should always be the last branch removed, and it shouldn't be allowed to be deleted if other branches exist. That seems like a bug to me.

No, this isn't true generally. You might want to retire a package in FN+1 while keeping it in FN, for example because it's been replaced by something newer. Or you might keep it just in the current stable version for the sake of backwards compatibility so that systems that have the package installed are properly cared for until the end of the support window. Finally, you might commit to only supporting FN because you don't have enough resources for other versions. In all those cases it's reasonable to retire just the master branch, and people who do the automatic retirement have no way of distinguishing those cases.

And actually master should always be the last branch removed, and it shouldn't be allowed to be deleted if other branches exist. That seems like a bug to me.

No, this isn't true generally. You might want to retire a package in FN+1 while keeping it in FN, for example because it's been replaced by something newer. Or you might keep it just in the current stable version for the sake of backwards compatibility so that systems that have the package installed are properly cared for until the end of the support window. Finally, you might commit to only supporting FN because you don't have enough resources for other versions. In all those cases it's reasonable to retire just the master branch, and people who do the automatic retirement have no way of distinguishing those cases.