Summary from yesterdays (mini) FESCo meeting
Thorsten Leemhuis
fedora at leemhuis.info
Fri Dec 29 14:00:02 UTC 2006
Hi all!
Mroe detailed variant of the summary and the full log can be found at:
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20061228
Note: due to the holiday season is was expected that probably only small
number of people could participate. FESCo nevertheless choose to run a
small and meeting without actually voting on anything.
== Summary ==
=== Minimal approve messages ===
Background: Some packages ( krename:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220210 and
pyfribidi: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219071
) were not branched by our human cvs guards because it was unclear if a
full review had beed done for them -- at branch request time there was
only a small note "APPROVED" in a comment of thereview bugs without
details what things had been checked
* dgilmore: the reason i refused to branch those two packages was that
the review just said i approve this; [...] i had no way to know if any
checking or anything was done
* tibbs: I agree that minimal reviews are bad (although they used to be
more common) but I'm not sure the two in question were minimal.
* thl: I'm wondering if we should add a rule like "the review has to at
least mention 8 points he checked when approving a package"
The decision went towards a proposed new rule: "the reviewer has to at
least mention that he checked the license, if the sources match upstream
and 5 other points he checked when approving a package". Dgilmore will
post to f-e-l about this whole thing in more detail and start a public
discussion before FESCo discusses this further.
Site note: the packages will probably get branched now, but the general
problem remains.
=== How to get something realized in Extras ===
thl wrote
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/HowToGetSomethingRealized
, tibbs improved it slightly -- FESCO members that were around liked it,
Will get posted to f-e-l for further comments.
=== free discussion around Extras ===
* there are still so many broken deps -> seems the ones that are left
need real work.
* XulChris: "is a dist tag of fc#.foo okay for 3rd party repos?" Some
disussions around this, the general consensus was "yes". XulChris will
probably make a wiki page for guidelines (no rules -- people don't have
to follow it, but they can if they want) on setting up a 3rd party repo
and what dist-tag to use.
EOF
CU
thl
More information about the Fedora-maintainers
mailing list