On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:38:38 -0500 wtogami@xxxxxxxxxx (Warren Togami) wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> 4) CVS Admins get e-mail about fedora-cvs flag. All context of the > >> review is within the bug itself, so they can easily read all > >> details about the package and verify approval validity. The Admin > >> then creates CVS directories and sets owner. Sets fedora-cvs flag > >> to BLANK. 5) Owner checks in and builds. > > > > Sounds great. > > How about also having the admin close the bug when they set the flag > > back to BLANK in step 4? One less thing for the submitter to forget > > to do. > > > > I don't think this is a good idea. CVS admins should not get too > deep into the package process itself. Closing a bug should be an > explicit decision of the owner/reviewer pair when the job is truly > done and verified. I suppose, but my thought was that once the package is added to CVS and owners.list (or the package database) there would be a bugzilla component for it. If it failed to build or had other issues, a new non review bug could then be filed against it to track it... Doesn't matter too much, just thought it could streamline the process some more. > > Warren Togami > wtogami@xxxxxxxxxx kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
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
