On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:29:41AM -0500, John Dennis wrote: > > If you think the problem would be mitigated by package maintainers > rigorously reviewing all changes *after* they've been committed you're > forgetting human nature and the fact most maintainers are over worked to > begin with. By extension if you demand maintainers review every commit then I completly disagree with that. If a packager is not capable of reviewing everything that goes through for his package then something is definitely wrong. Either the packager should orphan the package or ask for co-maintainership but should never let something happen without noticing. > how is that effectively different than the current process of posting a > patch in a bugzilla and asking the maintainer to review it before > committing it? It is different, not the same workflow. It seems to me that, for example, it is very time saving to have someone change the spec, ask a mail for rebuild, without going through bugzilla. Still the package maintainer has to understand enough every patch (or trust the other contributor enough after review). (As a side note I personally think that rebuilds/publishing should not be open while cvs should be.) It is more or less the case given that there is bodhi for stable, but for rawhide it is not the case. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
