https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755510
--- Comment #64 from nicolas.vieville(a)univ-valenciennes.fr ---
Jeff,
Thank you for your message and the clarification you provided. I know that I
must review some other packages in order to become a Fedora packager if I want
this package being a part of Fedora. I thought (maybe my fault) that I could
find the time to achieve at least two reviews. My full time job isn't in the IT
and is taking me much time (it's a full time job ;)) ), I can only work on
packaging on my free time (after the time for family).
However, as you suggested it, and in order to comply with your option A, I
approached two candidates for packaging through there review requests asking
them if they would be interested by an unofficial review from my part. No
response for the moment.
Maybe, I should have choose more recent review requests. I'll wait for a little
time about them, and will choose more recent review request in case I get no
response in the next week.
I thank you very much for your encouragement, but when I look at the
documentation about packaging for Fedora, I find some topics on which I think I
don't have the knowledge necessary to achieve a review on myself without a
great investment in time to get them (for example packages containing binary
libraries, or ruby, python, .js packages). But, if needed I will find the time
to document myself (it's not so difficult, it's only a question of time).
Thank you again for your interest.
I'll post here and let you know as soon as I have news about the unofficial
reviews.
Cordially,
--
NVieville
--
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