On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 07:51:48AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > (Fedora package review gets in the > > way, but I think even most Fedora developers think Fedora package > > review is the wrong approach.) > > > > *I* certainly don't think that. I do think that the method of > execution for package reviews sucks, but the fact we do them is > important. If we didn't do it, we'd have sloppier packages in Fedora. > I'd love for fedora-review to be integrated into Pagure into a set of > bots that run to evaluate and give feedback and then have packagers to > approve it to merge into the package collection. Right - I didn't mean that we shouldn't have a mechanism, only that it should be more of a continuous process. Personally I wouldn't mind having a completely automated process for new packages that puts them into an rpmfusion- / copr-type opt-in repo at first, and then allows them to be moved towards the main repo as they pass a mix of manual and automatic verification (with possibly packages moving in the opposite direction too). Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
