On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So I've been wondering a little bit how we could solve this and I've been > wondering if we couldn't leverage the PR workflow for this. > Imagine: > - You request a new repo to be created > - The new repo is automatically created from your request > - You fork it > - Push your spec file and patches to your fork > - Open a PR against the empty repo > > The package review becomes then a basic PR. We could leverage the tools we are > working on for regular PRs. > If the PR is approved, you get access granted to it. > If the PR is denied, both repo are deleted. This is a really interesting idea. I think having to version control spec files while they're going through review would probably help things a lot, and it definitely seems like the pull request workflow is a much more natural fit here. I'm a little uncomfortable with the "both repos are deleted" part of this though. One nice thing we have right now is that there's an archive of failed and/or dead reviews. In principle I could go through FE-DEADREVIEW and pick up tickets that got closed because a submitter vanished. Or search for a particular package to see if anyone had tried to submit it before, find out what went wrong, take a look at their spec, etc. So I think it would be important to preserve some record of failed reviews. As proposed here, it sounds like the pull request just gets deleted. But this is definitely a cool starting point for a better review process. > So there are a few works in the pipes for this. > Dist-git in staging already offers a better integration between dist-git and > anitya, you can see it for example at: > https://src.stg.fedoraproject.org/rpms/guake on the left hand side column. Yes, I have seen this-- glad to see it has been worked on. > the-new-hotness is being adjusted so that it opens a pull-request rather than a > bugzilla ticket. This doesn't quite solve the issue of "there is no-one to > review the ticket/PR" though. Having pull requests for this would be really nice. Like Fabio, I also never look at the patches generated by release monitoring, but if they were pull requests I'd definitely consider using them. As for not having someone to review the pull request... I think this is an area where we just need more monitoring, not necessarily automation. It would be wonderful if there was a page somewhere where I could see a list of all packages release monitoring thinks are outdated. Or (and maybe this is easier) if the "monitoring status" on the sidebar in Pagure showed that information too. If nothing else, it would save me a click or two when trying to check if a package is up to date. > Trying to improve the package review process is something that has been in my > radar for a while now but not high enough in the priority list. Sure, I understand. I appreciate that you're taking the time to think/work on this stuff! Ben Rosser _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
