On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 3:22 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 02:21:22 +0200, > Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> The added complication is that the criterion is when the package was last >> touched before being orphaned (and some people say it should be when it was >> last touched by the maintainer, which is even longer ago in qgis's case), >> not when the ownership was released. > > Well there seem to be exceptions to that. Packages often go 3 months without > updates, yet (at least informally) people orphan packages briefly to hand > them over to other people without this being checked. Presumably there is > an exception for orderly handovers where packages are only in orphan status > for a short amount of time. The re-review rule does seem to be oddly worded. If a very stable package, like FLAC, where the last rebuild took place during F-12, were to be orphaned, would it automatically need re-reviewing? Or do we assume what's intended is "unless the last CVS operation was 3 months or more *since the orphaning* ? -- Michel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
