How do you repropose a rejected package?

Greetings,

I can't figure out how to repropose a rejected package
(Log_XML
specifically).  I've cleaned it up and responded to all
comments.  I've
tried deleting it (no option), resubmitting it (no option)
and creating a
new proposal (says 'ERROR:  A proposal with that Catetory -
Name combination
already exists').  Should I make a new proposal with a
different name or do
I need to post to the list to get the old one deleted?

Thank you for your time,

Vladimyr

-- 
   Owner, <a href="http://www.peninsulawebsolutions.com">Peninsula Web
Solutions</a>

On 5/10/07, Michael Gower <designatevoidgmail.com> wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I can't figure out how to repropose a rejected package
(Log_XML
> specifically).  I've cleaned it up and responded to all
comments.  I've
> tried deleting it (no option), resubmitting it (no
option) and creating a
> new proposal (says 'ERROR:  A proposal with that
Catetory - Name
> combination
> already exists').  Should I make a new proposal with a
different name or
> do
> I need to post to the list to get the old one deleted?


Well I could delete it for you but I wonder if we should
keep the old one
for reference and all that ?

Dunno if people want to keep them or not.

Lets see if anyone says yes, else I'll just delete it for
you.

Regards
Helgi

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> Dunno if people want to keep them or not.

I can see a reason to keep these for historical
reasons/reference.

- --Joe



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFGQ1t3h0MUGpYY9OQRAuOIAJ9ZsC27Jsg3nPWJLrztzWBDB3Oc5ACe
LsvW
kmEnk00i0l67hr85ItUYgas=
=iqC+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Joe Stump wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>> Dunno if people want to keep them or not.
>
> I can see a reason to keep these for historical
reasons/reference.
>
So what should the name of the new proposal be, or should we
rename the 
old one?

-josh

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

On 5/10/07, Joshua Eichorn <joshbluga.net> wrote:
>
> Joe Stump wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> >> Dunno if people want to keep them or not.
> >
> > I can see a reason to keep these for historical
reasons/reference.
> >
> So what should the name of the new proposal be, or
should we rename the
> old one?


Well of course it would be best if we'd just change pearweb
to support
obsoleting a proposal but that'd take time so for now I'm
renaming it to
log_xml-old 

Go ahead and propose the "new" package

Regards
Helgi

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> So what should the name of the new proposal be, or
should we rename  
> the old one?

I'd say just allow PEPr to have multiple proposals if the
other one 
(s) were either deleted or failed, but not allow new ones if
any one  
of them succeeded.

- --Joe


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFGQ13Th0MUGpYY9OQRAjP8AKC4kwhU6ZWHqRZZDtbJMi8GNIJQrQCf
fUeI
5qNEXmPyuM2Klgghp03XsBM=
=uv/V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

On 5/10/07, Joe Stump <joejoestump.net> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> > So what should the name of the new proposal be, or
should we rename
> > the old one?
>
> I'd say just allow PEPr to have multiple proposals if
the other one
> (s) were either deleted or failed, but not allow new
ones if any one
> of them succeeded.
>
> - --Joe
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
>
iD8DBQFGQ13Th0MUGpYY9OQRAjP8AKC4kwhU6ZWHqRZZDtbJMi8GNIJQrQCf
fUeI
> 5qNEXmPyuM2Klgghp03XsBM=
> =uv/V
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

We could also automatically rename a proposal if it fails. 
We could have
something like "PackageName - Rejected (1st time)"
and "PackageName -
Rejected (2nd time)" if needed.  It would reduce
confusion compared to
having two rejected proposals of the same name on the same
web page.  Of
course, having the second proposal rejected does seem a bit
unlikely though.

Vladimyr

-- 
   Owner, <a href="http://www.peninsulawebsolutions.com">Peninsula Web
Solutions</a>