On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 14:40:41 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > these packages (https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jonludlam/opam/) > > > about a year ago and never heard back, so... technically I guess I > > > could proceed with the non-responsive maintainer policy. But is that > > > the right thing to do? > > > > If he wasn't sponsored, then he couldn't have requested the package > > repository to be created in Fedora git, so technically I think you (or > > anyone else) could open another review request, have it approved and > > import the package themselves. > > Well, this package has been approved, and it could be useful so I > don't mind importing it myself. I think the fact the review was done > 2 years ago shouldn't matter much as the OCaml packaging guidelines > haven't changed significantly. > > Unless anyone objects I'll import it when I get to it in the current > OCaml rebuild (https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6906). The ticket blocks FE-NEEDSPONSOR. No idea why you've approved the review officially, setting the fedora-review+ flag without being able to sponsor the new contributor. That has removed the ticket from the tracker list: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html You could have become a sponsor a long time ago, if you wanted to guide new packagers into the project. While any reviewer may post reviews these days and take over a lot of work that way, that doesn't work if there is no sponsor to complete the process. And most of the existing sponsors face the typical problem that they don't feel like sponsoring a complete stranger, who dumps a single src.rpm into bugzilla without demonstrating interest in becoming the Fedora maintainer of the package. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
