Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: xtide - Calculate tide all over the world
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211626
------- Additional Comments From pertusus(a)free.fr 2006-10-28 05:22 EST -------
(In reply to comment #61)
By the way, I have another question.
I submitted a re-review request as this because it has passed "long" since
xtide got dead, and actually it became to be clear that many changes are
needed as we discussed on this bug.
Also many packages from the early days of fedora extras, and from the
days when fedora core package entered in extras without a review don't
attain the same level of quality than more recently reviewed packages.
(and of course the guidelines change over time).
However in general is there any agreement when we should submit
re-review
requests for orphaned/dead packages? I cannot see any reference on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages .
I remember that being evoked and I think the rule was that if the package
was marked as dead in a previous release, (it is pretty tight here since
previous release is fc5) it needed a rereview.
( again I comment that for xtide I really think that re-review was
needed )
Indeed! I guess that a full security audit of xttpd would be nice, however
it would go beyond a review.
If Michael hasn't said anything on monday, you can import it on that day.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.