On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de> wrote:
Hi,
lately, I stumbled upon a review, which I thought, wouldn't suffice.
It looks like the following
name: ok
summary: ok
license: ok
handling locale files: ok
rpmlint output: only spelling warning
Not needed BuildRequires: (names), please remove them in git.
APPROVED.
My question is: is this review sufficient, if not, where is it written down,
that it isn't? I'm especially aiming to the form of this review.
I wasn't able to spot a requirement to write something like approved (or
something else) on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
Further more, there isn't anything said about how the reviewer should
document his work. If we deny the requirement of documenting reviewer's
operation, then just setting the approved flag conforms with the guidelines;
This also claims, everything has been checked and is well done.
Am I missing something? Is there any need to clarify our review guidelines?
Do we need something more documented? Do we trust our reviewers, so there's
no need of bureaucracy? Why should/must I do more than just setting the flag
or writing 7 catchwords?
I'd expect to see at least:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Spots_Review_Cheat_Sheet
But you're right, what you saw was pretty spartan.
-J
Thanks
--
Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de>
<mrunge(a)fedoraproject.org>
--
packaging mailing list
packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie