https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1273579
--- Comment #13 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) <sanjay.an...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #12) > (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #11) > > I'm happy to continue the review if another reviewer comes along, > I don't understand this sentence. Raphael said that he can review the > package in comment #8. If he cannot do it, I'm sure that somebody else (e.g. > me) would step up. Oh, he dropped the review after I asked his opinion about the build system change in comment 9 which I took as an indication that he agreed with me putting off the package (He isn't the assignee any more, and he isn't in the CC list either) :) > > > but I do > > think a re-review will be in order (even if unofficially) if the build > > system and change. > Nah, the build system is not visible in the binary package. As long as it > builds nobody cares (except the maintainer of course). That is what I meant - when a new build system comes, the entire package has to be effectively redone, and nest, as you'll see from the spec, isn't the simplest of packages. Totally a maintainers burden, yes, but I'm going to be the maintainer ;) > > > Is the plan to get all the neuroscience packages into Fedora by F24, though > > - or can we have a "group copr" thing running and transition packages over > > as they pass review? > > I don't think there's a plan to get "all" neuroscience packages into Fedora, > there's probably too many to even consider that. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NeuroFedora doesn't have a specific > list. New packages can be added at any time, and there's quite a bit of time > before Fedora 24 release (2016-05-17). I don't know about any plans to have > a group copr. I see coprs as a good mechanism to provide alternative > versions of already packaged software, or often updated software, or things > which are inappropriate for main Fedora for other reasons. I don't think > nest or other science related software falls into any of those categories, > and making a "detour" through copr would be mostly a waste of time. I think the list is somewhere on a google spreadsheet. I don't have the link handy at the moment. Coprs are also a good mechanism for packages that build and are functional but are not packaged well enough to pass a formal review yet (outer ring in fedora.next and all that), which is exactly what the nest package is at the moment. Anyway, I'm happy to continue the review if someone takes it up. I'll update the spec with Raphael's comments later this week. I already updated the copr package to 2.10 which came out recently. I need to work on the python3 bit etc. Cheers! Ankur -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
