Packaging review guidelines clarification

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le jeudi 16 février 2006 à 09:30 -0500, Josh Boyer a écrit :
> > On 2/16/06, Paul Howarth <paul at city-fan.org> wrote:
> >> The problem with that is that not every reviewer has the bandwidth to
> >> support a mock build environment (particularly for development), so it's
> >> probably left as a "should", but a failure being a blocker.
> >
> > there was a discussion at somepoint about scratch build trees in the
> > buildsystem to help with update builds.
> >
> > Would it be a worthwhile to extend that discussion about the value of
> > enhancing the build system to have scratch areas so reviewers could
> > submit srpms that aren't in cvs yet to spin up rpms using the
> > dedicated buildsystem hardware without having to pull the build
> > environment down locally?
> >
> > I have no idea how much work that would entail.. but its thing I think
> > which would most greatly impact the quality of the review process for
> > binaries.  Not having access to all build arches and not having the
> > bandwidth to pull down the development tree are large obstacles to
> > doing quality review builds, at least for me.
> 
> +1

+1

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20060216/c1cf8fed/attachment.sig>