[csw-maintainers] where is graphviz-2.28 ?

[Philip Brown]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:10 AM, John Ellson <ellson at opencsw.org> wrote:
>
> I'm more concerned that the failed batching process:
>
>        a) failed because of checks that should have been done much earlier
> in the process.
>
>        b) left the web pages in an inaccurate and inconsistent state.
>

yeah, it's "not pretty", registration wise.
theoretically, name collision checks should already have been handled by gar.
Just goes to show, that it's Not A Good Idea, to put 100% confidence
in a single automated process.
No process is 100% bug free. For QA purposes, it's a benefit to have 2
independant checks.

in smaller batches of 1 or two packages, it's easy for me to
re-register the "old" versions.
For this huge thing, it's a considerable chunk of work.
If there isnt going to be a quick (day or two) moving forward, then  I
will spend the time to de-rev the registrations. Otherwise, it seems
simplest for me to just wait for the update and push the batch
through.

Which way would you recommend we go?