On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:11:39 +0100, Haïkel Guémar wrote: > I think there's no problem for doing informal reviews, as long as your > review is ok, the sponsor could just approve it. Yes, there is no "sponsor must be the first reviewer" rule. Anyone can post feedback to review requests. Only the sponsor can approve the package, however. Effectively, the sponsor would still need to review earlier reviews and do a final review - sort of. With regard to review bug 860249 the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle page suggests that the reviewer has "good knowledge of font packaging policies," It also mentions the "repo-font-audit" tool, which complains about a couple of things. Same for the adobe-source-sans-pro-fonts package, but its review does not mention repo-font-audit: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/845743 > You could also advise him to do informal reviews on other packages and > add the links in their own reviews as many sponsors request this to > check new packagers skills and understanding of packaging. > It both helps the packager in fixing his packages, improving his skills > and the sponsor who could spend less time in doing reviews and either > spend more time in mentoring or sponsoring other packagers. Well, a lot of mentoring happens during reviewing, either in bugzilla or via different communication channels. -- Fedora release 18 (Spherical Cow) - Linux 3.7.2-204.fc18.x86_64 loadavg: 0.28 0.17 0.15 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
