Unblocking packages: new review needed?

[M.M.]

I have requested Release Engineering to unblock some packages,
which previously had been blocked on some branches:
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5387
I have been told that those packages must be reviewed again in order to be
unblocked.
I'm not 100% sure of what to do. Do I have to open a new review request on
Bugzilla for each package "from scratch" (i.e., exactly as if they were
completely new)?
Are there any further steps I must take?
Thank you in advance.
M.M.

[Tim Lauridsen]

Sound very strange, it is not some kind orphan package, there have been out
of Fedora and has to re-enter.
It it an active maintained package in F17, there just have not worked with
latest version for gnome-shell, because they change the way themes works in
every release.
It a waste of reviewers time to have to review such a package again IMHO.

Tim


On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:57 PM, M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it&gt; wrote:

>  I have requested Release Engineering to unblock some packages,
>  which previously had been blocked on some branches:
>  https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5387
>  I have been told that those packages must be reviewed again in order to be
>  unblocked.
>  I'm not 100% sure of what to do. Do I have to open a new review request
>  on Bugzilla for each package "from scratch" (i.e., exactly as if they were
>  completely new)?
>  Are there any further steps I must take?
>  Thank you in advance.
>  M.M.
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[Alec Leamas]

On 2012-11-07 15:47, tim.lauridsen(a)gmail.com wrote:
>  Sound very strange, it is not some kind orphan package, there have 
>  been out of Fedora and has to re-enter.
>  It it an active maintained package in F17, there just have not worked 
>  with latest version for gnome-shell, because they change the way 
>  themes works in every release.
>  It a waste of reviewers time to have to review such a package again IMHO.
>
>  Tim
>
>
>  On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:57 PM, M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it 
>  <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>      I have requested Release Engineering to unblock some packages,
>      which previously had been blocked on some branches:
>      https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5387
>      I have been told that those packages must be reviewed again in
>      order to be unblocked.
>      I'm not 100% sure of what to do. Do I have to open a new review
>      request on Bugzilla for each package "from scratch" (i.e., exactly
>      as if they were completely new)?
>      Are there any further steps I must take?
>      Thank you in advance.
>      M.M.
>
>      --
>      devel mailing list
>      devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:[e-mail]>
>      https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
>
>  
No top-posting in fedora-devel :)

Besides that, I can just agree with Tim. The oldest package was reviewed 
less than a year ago, the two others last summer. Requiring a new review 
is, well, somewhat formal.

That said, it should be easy to review these to resolve this issue. If 
you just make some new review requests, linking to the previous review 
I'll guess this could be handled without to much problems.

--alec

[Tim Lauridsen]

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Alec Leamas <leamas.alec(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  No top-posting in fedora-devel :)
>
>  
Sorry :)


>  Besides that, I can just agree with Tim. The oldest package was
> reviewed
>  less than a year ago, the two others last summer. Requiring a new review
>  is, well, somewhat formal.
>
>  That said, it should be easy to review these to resolve this issue.  If
>  you just make some new review requests, linking to the previous review I'll
>  guess this could be handled without to much problems.
>  
I don't see anywhere in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process

That a new review is needed,

"Reviews are currently done for totally new packages, package
renames<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Renaming_Process#Re-revi...;,
and packages merged from the old Fedora Core repository."

I don't see this case, fits any of the cases.

Tim

[Alec Leamas]

On 2012-11-07 16:53, tim.lauridsen(a)gmail.com wrote:
>  On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Alec Leamas <leamas.alec(a)gmail.com 
>  <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>      No top-posting in fedora-devel :)
>
>
>  Sorry :)
>
>      Besides that, I can just agree with Tim. The oldest package was
>      reviewed less than a year ago, the two others last summer.
>      Requiring a new review is, well, somewhat formal.
>
>      That said, it should be easy to review these to resolve this
>      issue.  If you just make some new review requests, linking to the
>      previous review I'll guess this could be handled without to much
>      problems.
>
>
>  I don't see anywhere in 
>  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process
>
>  That a new review is needed,
>
>  "Reviews are currently done for totally new packages, package renames 
>  <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Renaming_Process#Re-review_required>;, 
>  and packages merged from the old Fedora Core repository."
>
>  I don't see this case, fits any of the cases.
>
>  Tim
>
>
>  
It might be that you are right, dunno, this is just so weird. My point 
is just that three simple reviews might be less work than to discuss 
this until there is a Proper Solution.


--alec

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 16:59:19 +0100
Alec Leamas <leamas.alec(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  It might be that you are right, dunno, this is just so weird. My
>  point is just that three simple reviews might be less work than to
>  discuss this until there is a Proper Solution. 
The guideline is: 

If the package is "Retired" in pkgdb, in general it needs a re-review.
(Sometimes exceptions are made right after the per cycle mass
retirement for things that were mistakenly retired, etc). 

If it's "Orphaned" you can just take ownership and go on. 

I'll look at fixing the wiki 

kevin

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 16:59 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
>  On 2012-11-07 16:53, tim.lauridsen(a)gmail.com wrote: 
>  > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Alec Leamas
> <leamas.alec(a)gmail.com 
>  >  
>  >         Besides that, I can just agree with Tim. The oldest package
>  >         was reviewed less than a year ago, the two others last
>  >         summer. Requiring a new review is, well, somewhat formal.
>  >         
>  >         That said, it should be easy to review these to resolve this
>  >         issue.  If you just make some new review requests, linking
>  >         to the previous review I'll guess this could be handled
>  >         without to much problems. 
>  > I don't see anywhere
>  > in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process
>  > 
>  > That a new review is needed, 
>  It might be that you are right, dunno, this is just so weird. My
> point
>  is just that three simple reviews might be less work than to discuss
>  this until there is a Proper Solution.  
This is what you are looking for:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers#...

especially:
Deprecated packages require re-review if they are deprecated for more
than two weeks or if there is no previous review of the package. Submit
a review request (a new bugzilla ticket) and have the package approved
by a reviewer as if it were new to Fedora. See the package review
process for more information. 

Pierre