On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:39:31 +0100 (CET), Dag Wieers wrote: > > > Well, it used to be mandatory and all the QA checklist still require it. > > > It can't be more mandatory than that imo. I guess someone has to remove it > > > from the Wiki then ;) > > > > That infamous "QA checklist" is misunderstood frequently. It is hopelessly > > incomplete. If you go through it step by step upon reviewing a package, > > you can miss many other issues. If, however, the checklist were extended, > > it would grow *a lot* and increase the hurdle to QA significantly. The > > list in its current form just gives inspiration on what might be worth > > examining. > > Ok, then please remove the non mandatory steps from it, if you want to > remove the hurdle. It would have made this discussion non-existing ;) What would that change? We've talked about it, criticism has been noted, and as I've tried to make clear, the checklist should not be misunderstood. There is no silver bullet. One could create a different checklist for every different type of package. The biggest hurdle to QA is lack of common sense. I don't want to spend a lot of time editing documentation in the Wiki to please a single individual (read "you") who runs his own independent repository and doesn't really care. I'd rather like to know how to lower the hurdle for other people who would like to help, but who still don't know where to start. And that would mean that they start talking about any problems they see. --
