On Sun, 2005-12-25 at 15:05 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 25.12.2005, 01:13 -0500 schrieb Warren Togami: > > I realized that I made a mistake after approving luya too early. > [...] > > This mail was mostly me thinking to myself out loud. Will think about > > solutions later... > > I'd like to add one thing to your thinking -- some of his reviews simply > had a > ---- > Congragulations, your src.rpm has succesfully passed the test including > rpmlint > with built rpm and mock. > > The spec file fully complies with Packaging Guidelines > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines. > > It is the honor to get [...] package status as FE-ACCEPTED <- Snip -> > Comments? I agree, some of the reviews were also done before he even had a package accepted into FE, which troubles me. Ex. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173671 I think some of the problems we are experiencing, is due to some problems with step 7 in new contributors instructions. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors It seems that we are not taking enough time in ensuring that a thorough review is being given to contributor's first package by the appropriate people. For example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176096#c10 Part of the problem is the limited time available to people able to sponsor new participants due to being fairly busy with other aspects of FE (Seth, Spot, Warren, etc.). Then you add new participants impatience with having their first package accepted into FE, and you can see why step 7 isn't being followed as closely as it should be. /B -- Brian Pepple <bdpepple ameritech net> gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part