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

Suggestion for standardization



The package review process is utterly confusing to me, so it can't make
much more sense to everyone else.

I propose that we adopt an "ACK" style system, where trusted
contributors can ACK a package on review, two ACKs (maybe three?) will
mark it as approved/sponsored. The trusted contributor providing the
second ACK closes the bugzilla.

This presumes that the person submitting new packages for review is
already listed as a Contributor with CVS access.

If a trusted contributor "NACK"s a package, they have to provide a
reason, and the package cannot be submitted to CVS until the problem
causing the NACK is lifted, or the trusted contributor withdraws the
NACK.

Ideally, I'd like to do this in bugzilla.redhat.com. Perhaps we can
create a fedora-extras-QA component, and have new packages for review be
assigned to that. This component would go to all trusted contributors
(and/or fedora-extras-list) by default.

As is now, we're losing track of packages, no one knows when a review is
sufficient. The old bugzilla fedora.us system worked well for this, and
I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be adapted for FE.

The Red Hat folks should already be comfortable with the ACK system, so
it gives the best of both worlds.

I think assigning the "QA" group to the trusted contributors maps well
to the added responsibility of that role. If you're willing to sponsor
people, then you should be willing to QA new packages.

What do you think? If people like the idea, I could document it this
weekend, and we can start following it.

~spot
-- 
Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260
Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices)
Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org
Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!


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