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