On 10/11/2011 11:59 PM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
>
>> rvm:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745219
>
> I'm reviewing this.
Done.
>>
>> In accordance with Fedora policy
>> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_a_Deprecated_P
> rvm:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745219
I'm reviewing this.
>
> In accordance with Fedora policy
> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#Claiming_Ownership_of_a_Deprecated_Package),
> I am posting here, and asking for help in re-reviewing
On 10/11/2011 01:42 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> These are all needed for coda. Last I looked at them, getting them building
> properly was not so hard, getting them to run properly was a significant
> effort,
> one that may not be worth it, unless there are way more coda users out there
> than I'm a
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 13:24 -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> In trying to clean up the broken dependencies report, I intend to revive
> three retired packages:
>
> lwp:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745216
I had a few spare minutes today, so I reviewed and approved this one.
signatu
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 01:24:02PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> In trying to clean up the broken dependencies report, I intend to revive
> three retired packages:
>
> lwp:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745216
>
> rpc2:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745218
>
> rvm:
In trying to clean up the broken dependencies report, I intend to revive
three retired packages:
lwp:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745216
rpc2:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745218
rvm:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745219
In accordance with Fedora pol
