Attract QA'ers

[Erik LaBianca]

> What we need is an userinterface which reflects the QA process: it
> begins with the registration of a package, over a QA checklist till
the
> final publishing, the addition of bugzilla components and writing the
> package-announce.

This is a good idea. It's a pretty significant undertaking to implement,
however.

> The QA checklist should contain mandatory items (source verification,
> build/(de)installation correctness, ...)  and place for optional
comments,
> and the tester can click 'Yes, I approve it' finally or have the
chance to
> veto it.  Everywhere, a way must exist to say "does not apply to this
> package" (with an attached textfield for the reason), and GPG signing
of
> votes must by enforced and should be aided.

100% Agreed. The QA checklist as it stands is a mishmash of nice ideas,
mandatory checks, and instructions. I think it's imperative to automate
out the drudge work involved in QA reviews. Then reviewers can gain
credibility through understanding and analysis of packages, rather than
by spending hours downloading sources, checking builds, checking md5
sums and gpg sigs, hand-expanding Source0 macros, etc.

> I am not sure about the role of bugzilla in this process; perhaps some
> parts (e.g. userauthentification) could be reused. But most work must
> be done from scratch probably. Perhaps, actions/comments should be
> automatically submitted into bugzilla for documentation purposes.

It in my opinion depends on if anyone has the time to tackle the
project. I'd say it would be an appropriate task for a RedHat funded
individual, but they probably wouldn't agree. 

> The question is, whether it would be worth to begin such an
implementation
> for fedora.us or if it would be wasted time since it conflicts with
Red
> Hat's ideas about the Fedora Project.
> 

Yes. The question of the hour. Is there even anyone at RedHat assigned
to Extra's? Is that supposed to change? Did they read Jef's epistle on
volunteer coordination? If not, why not?

I think before tackling a replacement for QA in bugzilla, the process
itself needs to be formalized, documented and automated as much as
possible. The natural next step will be to create a system that fits the
process perfectly.

--erik