Bug 197907
| Summary: | Look at integrating "computer" menu from SUSE | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Rahul Sundaram <sundaram> |
| Component: | gnome-menus | Assignee: | Ray Strode [halfline] <rstrode> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | hdegoede, panemade, smohan |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2006-07-25 15:09:58 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Rahul Sundaram
2006-07-07 05:03:20 UTC
Not going to happen for FC6, at least If nobody has accepted the task of packaging slab then i am going to start its work in this weekend. Looks rather nice, definetly an extras candidate if its just an applet (IOW doesn't need any changes to other [ackages). I would be willing to review this, but rather not maintain it. Parag AN, who is your potential sponsor again? And what is your status with regard to getting sponsored? Currently i am not sponsored by anyone. I have submitted 6 packages to Fedora-extras and my activites are monitored by Paul Howarth. (In reply to comment #3) > Parag AN, who is your potential sponsor again? That would be me. > And what is your status with regard to getting sponsored? It's hard keeping up with Parag, who is very active! I'm obviously very happy with Parag's enthusiasm but I still feel there are things for Parag to learn. Parag has done lots of reviews very quickly, and I get the feeling that these just involve running through the package review checklist and ticking off the items. To me, a reviewer should be looking at a package in a similar way to the original submitter, which would tend to result in picking up a few things that could be missed by just running through the checklist. I'd hope that the experience of some of the previous reviews would illustrate that. What I'd like to see before I'd sponsor Parag (I don't think it'll be too long now): * Fewer, but more detailed reviews. * If you think that someone has done something wrong in a package, bear in mind that they may actually have a good reason for doing it that way (particularly if you're an inexperienced reviewer), so instead of telling them that what they've done is wrong, I'd rather see you ask the subitter why they did it that way instead of the way you think it should be done. This also helps inexperienced submitters, who may actually be doing the right thing and end up changing to the wrong thing. In short, if there is any doubt, ask questions. And keep up the good work! Thnaks for your comments. Will do detailed reviews. (In reply to comment #2) > If nobody has accepted the task of packaging slab then i am going to start its > work in this weekend. Nobody is current involved in this effort afaik, so go right ahead. Submitted slab package to fedora-extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199681 Thanks to Paul Howarth for helping me to get more knowledge on packaging slab package. With an Extras review under way, I guess we should close this for now. |