[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: procedure for renaming a package



On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 10:49:22AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 16:06 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > A review for the sake of a rename seems a complete waste of time to me.
> > I won't rename it, then, the benefits are not worth the costs.
> 
> The review gives us an opportunity to ensure that the package hasn't
> drifted too far from it's original state when it was first brought in,
> and it gets a second pair of eyes on the proper setup of
> Provides/Obsoletes, which can go wrong and often does.  Since we have no
> other formal re-review system, renames offer a little bit toward that.

I don't need a rereview of this package, currently. It is a (rather)
unusual package, and I'd prefer if reviewer interested in TeX/LaTeX used
their time differently, we seem to be very few in fedora, since reviewing 
it carefully is certainly very time-consuming.

> Given the vast number of improper Provides/Obsoletes I've ran across, I
> feel strongly that I'd like a second pair of eyes on any such additions.

Sure, but a re-review is much more than that.

--
Pat


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]