>>>>> "GD" == Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: GD> Are there any steps we can take to protect ourselves from this GD> kind of mistake -- in which a packager does something dumb to the GD> package and no one notices it? Well, we're starting with http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PatchUpstreamStatus which has been passed by the packaging committee and ratified by FESCo. Of course, it's not mandatory, but it's a start. (And as much as I hate to think about more bureaucracy, it's probably worth considering whether it should be mandatory in light of the problem under discussion.) >From here we can both extend the information we keep about patches and write some tools for tracking and displaying that information so that folks can examine the patch status of a package without having to read the specfile or pulling patches from CVS. - J< _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
