Re: Unofficial review MUST items

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 16:29:39 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 05:09:58PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 15:56:33 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >   
> > > > 4) Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines: this seems to me like
> > > > a catch all question, it summarizes all other items, doesn't it?    
> > > 
> > > Yeah. The checklist in fedora-review requires contains a few strange
> > > items. That is one.  
> > 
> > Funny you would say that. It's one of the items copied from the official
> > Review Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines  
> 
> It's like the OP said: there's a long list of checks for the
> guidelines, and somewhere in the middle we have a question that
> encompasses most of the others. This is not useful: the whole point of
> a checklist is that it contains items which are small enough to be
> checked. This question would be like an airplane pilot's checklist
> saying "Are you flying the plane correctly?".

It has been pointed out several times before that it's a catch-all and
quite demanding as such. The entire checklist could be reduced to that
single MUST item. Hundreds of package review approvals have incorrectly
answered that checklist item as [X].

Don't blame fedora-review. Try to get the Review Guidelines changed first.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux