Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758448 --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2011-12-01 13:23:47 EST --- Well, first off I had no idea that Mick was not a packager; this ticket doesn't include that information. (Review procedures indicate that you should at least block the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracking bug.) As for the issue at hand, I think this is something the EPEL folks need to work out. As a sponsor, simply opening a bunch of reviews for packages which are already in the distribution and already meet the packaging guidelines doesn't really show much understanding of the process, since there's no real work shown. And I guess the whole "become a comaintainer" path doesn't work because the existing maintainer has no interest in EPEL and Mick doesn't appear to have any interest in Fedora. And in the end, were I one of the folks interested in EPEL I think I'd want the procedure to be more stringent, given both the level of "important machine" penetration and their difficult position with regards to support and upgrades (i.e. being responsible for an EPEL release for way, way longer than a Fedora maintainer has to care about a release). Yes, it's a mess. In the end what you need is a sponsor, and all of our procedures around that are based simply on getting enough information out there so that sponsors can make a reasonable decision. The situation at hand doesn't really present many opportunities for us to make that decision. So I don't know. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review