On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 07:43:26PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 07/02/2010 07:37 PM, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > Ok, this policy was for the other case, a case when the maintainer > > does not respond. I am not saying that it happens a lot, but it > > happened in the past, and the syslog-ng case exposed in the thread is > > another recent case. Maybe a policy is not needed and a case by > > case handling by escalation to FESCo is enough, though. In my > > days as a Fedora contributor, however, this issue was annoying > > enough that I proposed the policy, maybe things have changed > > now. > > A global view of package versions in rawhide vs the latest upstream > similar to http://wiki.debian.org/DEHS would be useful to know how we > stand. Rakesh Pandit was looking into this earlier. Not sure of the > status on that now.
Most of the packages listed here are not up to date: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=exact&query_format=advanced&bug_status=ASSIGNED&email1=upstream-release-monitoring%40fedoraproject.org&product=Fedora Regards Till
pgpIMNkrEmufg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
