Summary from yesterdays (mini) FESCo meeting

[Callum Lerwick]

On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 11:19 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> hrm, you must wear at least 5 pieces of flair...  Seriously, a rule like this 
> just encourages folks to check 5 things only and move on.  If rules were set 
> in place to make 5 specific things mandatory, that's all that will be 
> checked.  Lets not give reviewers a shortcut out.  I'd be more in favor of a 
> rule that just says "items checked need to be listed out in the review before 
> building of the package will be allowed".  Vague enough as to not give 
> reviewers a shortcut.

Which is the whole idea of my checklist. It follows the MUST list
basically point-for-point. (Some related stuff gets mushed together into
one item, like everything relating to %file lists, and directory/file
ownership.) Everything in the MUST list is a MUST, and thus... MUST be
checked.

And really, the list is primarily for *my* benefit. To make sure *I*
don't miss any of them. I don't know how anyone could keep track of all
that in their head. And since I'm keeping a checklist anyway, I might as
well post it in the review.

Like Axel said, professional pilots and NASA astronauts keep pre and
post-flight checklists. (And in the case of NASA, a bazillion in
between...) I honestly don't understand how a professional packager
could be so against keeping a review checklist. Of MUST items. To each
their own I guess.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20061231/242af4be/attachment.sig>