On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 15:55:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > 19:54 < BobJensen> | People I have talked to abotu submitting packages are frustrated by the reviw process > I would prefer if those unnamed people contacted FESCO or fedora-extras-list directly. In case you picked yourself as the spokesman of that group, provide some details, please. From my perspective (and I admit I've been doing a *lot* less reviews myself compared with fedora.us era), many reviews are still quite difficult and time-consuming. The usual packaging mistakes range from "simply fails to build" to "does not work at run-time" and "does not erase without errors". There are packages which NEEDSWORK, not seldomly due to severe packaging mistakes. There are packages, where the reviewers becomes an instructor (same thing applies to some upstream projects). And there are packages, where the packagers seem to spend less time on packaging and testing than the reviewer(s) do. The recent repo breakage caused by invalid "Provides" plus some bugs in new packages and updates are reason enough not to "lower the hurdle" by altering the review process for new packages. In general, reviews and approvals can be sped up by bringing packages in shape, doing test-builds and reviews and run-time tests and only then declaring a package as "ready". Better check your own package more carefully instead of relying on reviewers. Everybody can help with that in bugzilla. New packagers can demonstrate good packaging practice and that they are aware of things discussed in the packaging guidelines/policies. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
