-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jesse Keating schrieb: > There was recent discussion (on IRC) that some felt a full > re-review as "overkill" or worse "a waste of time". I think it's > fair to re-evaluate what we're trying to accomplish with a > re-review and re-assess if a full review is indeed what "we" (IE > the Fedora community, represented by FESCo) want. Be in mind, as long as you don't rename you package, you can make any changes on your package without you need a review for it. Question: Why you need a full review, if you want to rename your package? Of course, you can say, that you want to be sure, that you don't want to get a naming conflict due the renaming of the package and have the right Provides/Obsoletes statements in the renamed package to be sure to have a proper updating path. But this is not a full review from my pont of view. Best Regards: Jochen Schmitt -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAklKkmoACgkQT2AHK6txfgyI0gCaAxM1kZEgKEnK0nJiRvBiZ+WD OCoAoNtKHLC2qvgRtAF3WeuSOJmS6Y0b =zrfw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
