Recapitulate the current state of Fedora Extras and some ideas to make it better
Rex Dieter
rdieter at math.unl.edu
Mon Jul 10 19:30:34 UTC 2006
Christian.Iseli at licr.org wrote:
> rdieter at math.unl.edu said:
>
>>If by "fail the build" you really mean "warn the packager", then we're in
>>agreement. (:
>
>
> I'd like something a bit more intrusive than a warning. What I'd like to see
> is:
...
> 5. at this point, maintainer has to scan the diffs and make a decision:
> A. the diffs are inocuous -> update the reference files and resubmit the
> build
>
> Community will see the updates to the reference files and can comment where
> needed...
>
> I think this would be a pretty nice and easy QA improvement.
Ugh, one more thing for packagers to do (maintaining rpmlint and rpm
Provides/Requires reference files). I suppose if it could be made
dead-simple to maintaine/update, via something like,
make update-buildsys-reference-files
(or whatever), I wouldn't mind.
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list