On 06/28/2016 08:07 PM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: > > I have a follow-up question on the production of these artifacts - > when do we check whether the RPMs or, the images produced are sane? > For example, that the RPMs are packaged well and as per specifications > ... > For Fedora/RHEL/CentOS rpms: + People file bugs, e.g. against Fedora/glusterfs or GlusterFS/packaging, and we fix them. + Some of us occasionally do package reviews for new packages and/or closely follow the Fedora packaging guidelines and when we see something that ought to be done in the glusterfs packaging we fix it. + Every once in a while I run rpmlint and address the things it finds. + And of course we get feedback from downstream packaging. + Finally, I keep the Fedora dist-git .spec and our upstream .spec in sync. For SuSE RPMs I use a .spec file based on the one that SuSE uses/used for their distribution's bundled packages. For Debian/Ubuntu debs I use packaging bits provided by Louis Zuckerman (irc nick: semiosis) that he developed with, I believe, the help of Patrick Matthaei, the Debian packager who builds Debian's bundled packages. Resyncing with Patrick's packaging bits is on my list of things to do in my copious spare time. In the mean time people occasionally report issues with the debs and I fix them. -- Kaleb _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
