On Saturday 30 December 2006 12:48, Axel Thimm wrote: > Just let me comment that when I explored becoming a contributor to FE > one of my most pleasant experiences when I checked the packages > submission procedure back then was the high quality of reviewing done > and the implied quality of the packages. > > Until this thread I wasn't aware of monolectical reviews and if this > would become a habit it would decrease the quality of packages let > through. Which I find a pity as one of the nicest parts of FE was the > quality of packages. Whether or not the guidelines were regurgitated into the bug report has no bearing on if a valid and quality review was done. None whatsoever. All it does is say "this person copied/pasted some content from a wiki page, and possibly filled in some blanks". It does not prove or disprove that the reviewer actually LOOKED at the package in question. There is no way to tell that, without video proof of the review. You have to trust your reviewers, and spotchecks go a long way toward that. Just pasting content does NOT help the problem. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpmzra3mxF0G.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
