On Sunday 31 December 2006 07:11, Callum Lerwick wrote: > I don't see how this is relevant. I don't see how a checklist of MUST > items *couldn't* keep an honest person from missing a MUST item. I don't think arguing that having a condensed one line per rule checklist that could be consulted during review. I think this is a fine idea. What people (including me) are objecting to is forcing the reviewer to paste this list into the review bug. > If someone's intent on being actively dishonest, then we have a much > greater problem than some half-assed package reviews slipping by. Exactly. If there is a problem with somebody just saying "APPROVED" and not actually doing the review right, that same person will most likely just past the checklist and quickly fill it out (or use a pre-filled list) and STILL not actually review. This doesn't do anything to solve the problem it just hides it behind more useless noise. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpzzxFOQrGFN.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
