On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 10:49:22AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 16:06 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > A review for the sake of a rename seems a complete waste of time to me. > > I won't rename it, then, the benefits are not worth the costs. > > The review gives us an opportunity to ensure that the package hasn't > drifted too far from it's original state when it was first brought in, > and it gets a second pair of eyes on the proper setup of > Provides/Obsoletes, which can go wrong and often does. Since we have no > other formal re-review system, renames offer a little bit toward that. I don't need a rereview of this package, currently. It is a (rather) unusual package, and I'd prefer if reviewer interested in TeX/LaTeX used their time differently, we seem to be very few in fedora, since reviewing it carefully is certainly very time-consuming. > Given the vast number of improper Provides/Obsoletes I've ran across, I > feel strongly that I'd like a second pair of eyes on any such additions. Sure, but a re-review is much more than that. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
