On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 18:15 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > Uh, why? If the review process is broken surely there's a better way > to address that than just saying that select packages just get to > bypass it. > > The only justification I can think of would be that the packages have > to go in absolutely immediately. But there was time for FESCo to meet > about it, so that must not be the case. I may not be doing many > reviews lately and may be a bit behind on the reviews that I'm doing, > but if someone pinged and say that they had an emergency and needed > something reviewed right away, I'd do whatever I possibly could. I'm told that in this case, the problem is getting packaging people to fix up the packaging issues with the software, not the reviewer side. The java team wished to move forward and get packages beat into shape as they find issues building the whole mess together before they concentrate on the packaging aspects of it. The timing worked out in that Fernando asked me today about it, and a FESCo meeting happened today. They're trying to get work started on Monday (in China no less). -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
