-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 20 January 2004 21:51, Todd wrote: > Is there a recommended format or template for adding comments on QA to > bugzilla? If there isn't, can someone point me to some examples of > what are considered good QA comments in bugzilla? > > I've gone through the QA Checklist[1] on the tcpdump SRPM that > Christian posted a few days ago for RH7.3 and would like to post that > data so the package can get closer to being put into updates-testing. > > [1] http://www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy/QAChecklist Thank you for your work! I've been using the following format: {RHL release} {sha1sum or md5sum of the srpm} {srpmfilename} {Work performed, comments, suggestions} {Vote for Publish or not} Put all of this in a file and gpg --clearsign the file. Paste the results of the clearsign into bugzilla. Add yourself to the bugzilla CC list if you wish. <exmaple> 7.3 e22108165eeb8a4f2d6f078600117d2a3b5dc88d screen-3.9.11-4.legacy.src.rpm Package sums check out, verified patch against CAN article. Patch applies cleanly during build, build completes. ldd comparison from previous release of package to this release matches up. Basic functionality tests pass. I vote for PUBLISH </example> Once again, thank you for your work! - -- Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE (http://geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (http://www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy) Mondo DevTeam (www.mondorescue.org) GPG Public Key (http://geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFADhZv4v2HLvE71NURAhE7AJ9/l9fEr33nYSDNMw3W/rGJ2mSTRwCePJlW AUa2WtyCTzaU7QqMc0IZMss= =p7tM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
