Mono Package audit

[Jesse Keating]

On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 10:05 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> 1) It's more flexible when we want to add a check for some other
> problem besides dlls

Doesn't prevent this from still happening.

> 2) There is a way for maintainers to override it sanely if need be; we
> really want fewer hardcoded macros (c.f. the discussion about
> overriding the debuginfo stuff)

Wrong answer.  We absolutely cannot allow any pre-built binary to go
through and be packaged.  Period.

> 3) It moves us towards fixing our current model where there is a very
> high bar to entry, but a very low bar to further changes.  You could
> imagine for example that our process would block a package from being
> distributed that added an rpmlint regression unless it was
> peer-reviewed.

Again, that can still be done on the side just as easily, nothing
preventing that.

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE      (jkeating.livejournal.com)
Fedora Project          (fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080410/55b9e8eb/attachment.sig>