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

Re: Packaging review guidelines clarification

On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 10:25 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Paul Howarth <paul city-fan org> wrote:
> > The problem with that is that not every reviewer has the bandwidth to
> > support a mock build environment (particularly for development), so it's
> > probably left as a "should", but a failure being a blocker.
> there was a discussion at somepoint about scratch build trees in the
> buildsystem to help with update builds.
> Would it be a worthwhile to extend that discussion about the value of
> enhancing the build system to have scratch areas so reviewers could
> submit srpms that aren't in cvs yet to spin up rpms using the
> dedicated buildsystem hardware without having to pull the build
> environment down locally?
> I have no idea how much work that would entail.. but its thing I think
> which would most greatly impact the quality of the review process for
> binaries.  Not having access to all build arches and not having the
> bandwidth to pull down the development tree are large obstacles to
> doing quality review builds, at least for me.


This is a excellent idea and I hope someone can find some time to
(please!) look into it.


Edward H. Hill III, PhD
office:  MIT Dept. of EAPS;  Rm 54-1424;  77 Massachusetts Ave.
             Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
emails:  eh3 mit edu                ed eh3 com
URLs:    http://web.mit.edu/eh3/    http://eh3.com/
phone:   617-253-0098
fax:     617-253-4464

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