On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 01:22:59AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > I would normally agree, but I have seen a number of cases where people > > got Obsoletes/Provides wrong and caused a mess. ;( > > > > I would like to see them get another pair of eyes on their package > > before pushing the renamed version out. Thats all. > > Then maybe the guideline should be that the reviewer has to check for valid > Obsoletes/Provides, but any other checks are optional (as in: if the > reviewer notices something obviously wrong, he/she should report it and > request it fixed before approving the rename, but he/she shouldn't be > required to go through the whole checklist again)? I think it would be right like that. A normal review is unneeded in my opinion, and not checking obsoletes... is wrong too. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
