> On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 12:49:17PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski > wrote: >> >> Oh, how I hate such vague accusations. Ralf! Please tell us exactly who >> you're referring to and what *exactly* makes you think they have no >> clue. > > I have the same feeling than Ralf, some reviewer just do superficial > reviewing without really looking at the relevant details. I won't tell > names. I also think that it was much less the case in the past, say, > roughly in the extras days. Are there any specific deficiencies you find particularly troubling? I suppose you can't really post links if you don't want to name names, but could you characterize something in general terms? Not looking to start a flamewar or witchhunt, just trying to make sure I understand the problem. > That being said, this is not really relevant to the issue here, I mean, > template or not this issue will remain. And I think that I was in the > category of the people who 'have no clue' when I did my first > packages... > > Maybe the sponsor should look over sponsoree shoulder for some time > until the packager is knowledgable enough about packaging that he can > do reviews with an understanding of what he is doing, and not applying > some cookbook recipes (like look at rpmlint and it's done). > > This is not an easy issue, though, especially since many veteran > packagers from the beginning of fedora extras don't seem to show a lot > of activity these days in the reviews. > > -- > Pat > > -- > Fedora-packaging mailing list > Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging > -- novus ordo absurdum -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
