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

Frustrated package submitters? (was: Re: Summary from last FESCo meeting)



On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 15:55:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> 19:54 <   BobJensen> | People I have talked to abotu submitting packages are frustrated by the reviw process
>

I would prefer if those unnamed people contacted FESCO or fedora-extras-list
directly. In case you picked yourself as the spokesman of that group,
provide some details, please. From my perspective (and I admit I've been
doing a *lot* less reviews myself compared with fedora.us era), many
reviews are still quite difficult and time-consuming. The usual packaging
mistakes range from "simply fails to build" to "does not work at run-time"
and "does not erase without errors". There are packages which NEEDSWORK,
not seldomly due to severe packaging mistakes. There are packages, where
the reviewers becomes an instructor (same thing applies to some upstream
projects). And there are packages, where the packagers seem to spend less
time on packaging and testing than the reviewer(s) do. The recent repo
breakage caused by invalid "Provides" plus some bugs in new packages and
updates are reason enough not to "lower the hurdle" by altering the review
process for new packages.

In general, reviews and approvals can be sped up by bringing packages in
shape, doing test-builds and reviews and run-time tests and only then
declaring a package as "ready". Better check your own package more
carefully instead of relying on reviewers. Everybody can help with that in
bugzilla. New packagers can demonstrate good packaging practice and that
they are aware of things discussed in the packaging guidelines/policies.


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