Re: Pending ACLs

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

 



On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 03:34:58PM +0200, Helio Chissini de Castro wrote:
> I have a strong opinion over this
> 
> All the ACL's should be accepted, doesn't matter the level.
> And why i think of this ?
> 
> Two simple reasons:
> - The packager abandoned the package, because several reasons, and then is
> far away from Fedora systems for some time
> - The packager is actively using Fedora, but seen not care to even properly
> take care of his package, not in the minimal sense to deny the ACL, which
> would be acceptable.
> 
> In both cases, the package became hostage to someone that for sure aren't
> caring much for the distro, unless prove me wrong.

Hi,

On one hand I agree with you, on the other hand I do think that
sometimes pkgdb notifications are not so visible and therefore someone
could inadvertly loose track of some notifications and with your
proposal, this would trigger an auto-approval.

Best,
Fale
-- 
Fabio Alessandro Locati
Red Hat - Senior Consultant

PGP Fingerprint: E815 3C49 2A8D FD8B 1CBD  BC85 FDB3 DF20 B2DC 9C1B

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

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

[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