Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "DH" == Dan HorÃk <dan@xxxxxxxx> writes: >>>>>> > > DH> My question is whether I could do the formal review on one of the > DH> modules, update the spec generator as required, refresh the spec > DH> files and then somehow mass-import the rest. > > Well, you should of course submit one or two first and then adjust the > rest based on feedback. But if you want an exemption from Fedora > policy, you should talk to FESCo. Personally I'd think that every > package needs a review, regardless of how trivial you believe that to > be. (Witness Perl modules, which are almost all identical and > mechanically generated.) But don't dump them on the review queue all at > once, unless you want to annoy people and have them ignore your packages > altogether. > > - J< > -- > packaging mailing list > packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging > Agreed, and by the same token, if they're all materially the same, the reviews should be easy. :) -J -- in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
