On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:00:46 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le lundi 30 octobre 2006 à 16:18 +0100, Michael Schwendt a écrit : > > > There is a simple solution: --> All or nothing. <-- > > > > [...] > > > > Don't build pieces of a package-set just because they are approved > > already. Keep all dependencies in FE-ACCEPT state until the other packages > > in FE-REVIEW are approved, too. > > It's simple but stupid. Great choice of language here. Either you have misunderstood me or you are out on a mission to insult other people. Or both. > 1. The dependencies won't conflict less when released later, you're only > maximizing the pain by releasing packages which never had exposure > separately. No, far from it. And there is nothing like "maximizing pain". You only try to play with words. Actually, in the majority of cases it is impossible to review individual pieces of a dependency-chain without taking a look at the entire set of packages. > 2. You're needlessly maximising bureaucratic inertia. Where? > Dependencies often > have worth by themselves, either for other FE packages or for people > running unpackaged stuff in the wild. You say "stupid", I say "nonsense". > For example a few years ago I > packaged most amavisd-new deps which certainly helped when amavisd-new > was packaged by someone else. Your rule would have forced the > amavisd-new packager to start from scratch. No. Please re-read and try again. > 3. You're rewarding the people who don't get their packages reviewed and > penalise people who follow the appropriate process. No. This comment is beyond my comprehension. Sounds like FUD. Try again. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
