On mass renames

[Jonathan Underwood]

2008/12/18 Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net>:
>
> Sometimes, it is necessary to perform a mass rename to bring some
> consistency to a class of packages.
>
> In that case any workflow that proceeds package by package is the road
> to failure, since
> — either each package is done separately by different people with little
> coordination (and you don't get consistency, some packagers will always
> slack or fail)
> – or one person goes through each package and you get burnout and again,
> failure (and I won't even speak of doing a new review for each package)
>
> I'd like to see a mode where:
> — a list of consistent renames is approved collectively
> — the associated cvs work is done in one shot by infra
> — each individual packager gets to work on the spec changes of his
> packages
> — an experienced packager or a group of packagers is mandated to check
> it's done correctly and eventually to substitute to the packagers who
> don't do their bit at all

There's a lot of merit to this (I'm thinking here of the tetex->tex
renames that are needed).