On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 17:09 -0500, Warren Togami wrote: > FESCO Members, I would like this process to be ratified in order to get > rid of CVSSyncNeeded. If you think the process below should be adjusted > before ratification, please reply with comments. This has NOTHING to do > with the review process which must be fixed independently. > > Changes since Version 2: > - notting pointed out, how do people request branches for a package > already imported? Just comment in the bug and set fedora-cvs? again. > This works fine even on CLOSED bugs. > - Multiple owners are possible. Please comma separate the owners in a list. > - Other ways to use fedora-cvs are spelled out explicitly. > > Thanks, > Warren Togami > wtogami@xxxxxxxxxx > > Current Crappy CVSSyncNeeded Wiki Procedure > =========================================== > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded > 1. Request new package and branch. > 2. Wait until somebody creates empty directories and edits owners.list. > 3. Owner checks stuff in and builds. > > Using the Wiki for this process has always sucked. We could embed this > process within the Bugzilla review tickets themselves. > > ================================== > = Proposal: CVS Admin with Flags = > ================================== > New Packages > ============ > 1) Review is complete, fedora-review+ > 2) Owner writes in the Bugzilla comment something like: > <Branches> <PackageName> <BugzillaNames> > Please comma separate the co-maintainers if you have more than one. > Examples: > FC-5 FC-6 foopackage bobjoe@xxxxxxxxx > FC-6 barpackage bobjoe@xxxxxxxxx,mary@xxxxxxxxxxx > > 3) Set fedora-cvs flag to ? > 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 in owners.list. Clear the fedora-cvs > flag to BLANK. > 5) Owner checks in and builds. > > More Branches on Existing Packages > ================================== > 1) Use existing review ticket, even if it is CLOSED, this is fine. > 2) Write in a comment the additional branch names you desire. > 3) Set fedora-cvs? > > Change Owner or Add Co-Maintainers > ================================== > 1) Use existing review ticket, even if it is CLOSED, this is fine. > 2) Write in a comment the change request and justification if appropriate. > 3) Set fedora-cvs? > > (If bulk changes are required (i.e. more than six at once), please talk > directly to a Fedora CVS administrator.) > > Special CVS Admin Requests > ========================== > In some cases you will want special CVS requests, like fixing import > accidents or removing packages that were added in error. > 1) Use existing review ticket, even if it is CLOSED, this is fine. > 2) Write in a comment your request and why it should be done. > 3) Set fedora-cvs? > > Benefits > ======== > - This fedora-cvs flag eliminates the need for CVSSyncNeeded > entirely. An actual work queue with tickets! > - fedora-cvs can be a simple canned query for CVS admins to see. > Awesome possibilities offered via RSS too... =) > > Notes > ===== > - Unlike other flags, fedora-cvs is only BLANK or ?. fedorabugs members > may request fedora-cvs by setting it to ?. This sends an e-mail to CVS > Admins, signifying that attention is required. > - Syncing from owners.list to CVS ACL's happen every 30 minutes. I think we're going to run into potential confusion with the use of flags here and for determining status during the review. However, I think that using a flag here is better than using CVSSyncNeeded. So I'm +1 here but am noting that it makes me slightly more biased against using flags for reviews. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 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
