Re: New packager: Do the reviewer and the sponsor have to be the same

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

 



Le Lun 21 janvier 2013 16:47, Susi Lehtola a écrit :
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:30:04 +0100
> Michael J Gruber <mjg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I would like to help this poor soul get his package into Fedora:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249
>>
>> (adobe-source-code-pro-fonts)
>>
>> I'm a packager but no sponsor, he's no packager (so needs a sponsor).
>> It's not clear to me whether I can just make a formal review and ask a
>> sponsor to say "yes", or the new packager needs an actual review from
>> a sponsor (different pages seem to disagree somewhat on this).
>>
>> An old request for sponsorship on the fonts-SIG list has not been
>> answered so far, which is why I'm trying to help this way.
>
> Well, my opinion is: go for it. IMHO it's a lot easier to sponsor
> someone who already has shown his/her packaging skills. It's just less
> work for the sponsor... providing the review is of good quality.
>
> Now, of course the package won't make it into the repo before the
> packager has been sponsored.

The request looks good, if I had more free time to help a new packager I
wouldn't have a problem sponsoring him. As things stand I would be an
absentee sponsor which is something I want to avoid.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux