[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RFC: fedora.us QA approval format


Sorry to write back so late about that.

Toshio wrote:
> * I would get rid of the first line altogether.  Because these reviews
> are going into bugzilla, the package name is already available.  And it
> doesn't provide any information the build system needs.  Alternately,
> you could make the first line:
> so that it's useful for the build system.  (But see my next entry.)
> * I would change Files to MD5sums (or MD5SUMS) because at sometime in
> the future the build system may support other hash types and it would be
> good for it to be able to easily tell which is which one this is.
> * I would specify that the <SRPM> always comes first in the HASH
> section.  This makes it easier for the release managers and the
> buildsystem to parse the HASH-SRPM pairing from the other files.
> It could also be separated by a blank line or other visible
> demarcation.

OK. I've updated http://fedora.us/wiki/QAFormat. How do you like it now ?

> * Regarding the Sources lines: I'd include the full URL for the
> tarball and say it comes from a canonical source rather than simply
> "is valid".
>   * http://www.caliban.org/files/bash/bash-completion-20040331.tar.gz is
>     the canonical Source location

Maybe the full URL is not necessary in the review, we could just add that
canonicalness has been checked.
I'm worried about the fact that bugzilla's mails are reformated to 80 (or
some) characters columns, thus breaking GPG check. I try to avoid long
lines, and an URL will probably be too long.

> For the other source line, I'd want something like this:
>   * Sources: bash-completion.profile appears to be correct and proper
> My reasoning is that I don't care so much about whether I can download
> the files off the internet  (More precisely: I only care if I can't.)
> I do want to know what works  been done verifying the sources (which
> canonicalness of source tarballs helps for the first one and looking
> at the file helps for the second.)

Good point. Done.

> Anyhow, this looks like it'll be a tremendously helpful tool when
> it's finished.  Good work!

Thanks :-)

Can you (and any fedora-devel subscriber) give me your comments about the
new page at http://fedora.us/wiki/QAFormat ?

http://gauret.free.fr   ~~~~   Jabber : gauret amessage info
Accroche-toi au prompt, j'enlève le shell.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]