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

Re: Draft: simple update description guidelines

Robert Scheck wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
The general consensus seem to push for more of a best practises document. So I am going with


Once more: Why do we not explicitly ask the Bodhi submitter for details
using much more fields? Having more possibilities to fill data in makes it
easier to new packagers - they're remembered. Why do you want to solve a
thing with a Guideline rather enhancing Bodhi and making that software just
packager friendly?

We can do both. These guidelines cover more than just update descriptions now and it is useful to document all these things in the wiki. Then, I can also file a RFE against bodhi to add some more information. However, note that existing comments in bodhi has been ignored many times. If you want to file a RFE yourself, go ahead and post the link when you are done.


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