Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >>> I think we'll see substantial savings from allowing through things that >>> meet a heuristic while still placing the burden of checking this onto an >>> automated tool instead of a human. >> Automated checks will always misfire and annoy the heck out of packagers. I >> don't think it's Koji's job to do this kind of checks. >> > Sure they'll misfire and sure they'll annoy packagers. But will they > annoy packagers more than FPC making a Guideline like "Every package > with noarch subpackages must be scratch-built in koji and checked to > make sure the noarch rpm's are the same"? > And since this might give the wrong impression: If I introduce a Guideline, it won't be this broad. Certain types of files would be okay and certain types have to be looked at.... but it still means an extra step for reviewers. Another benefit of a builder check instead of a review check is we get checking for every rebuild whereas review items are only thoroughly checked at package submission. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
