Summary from yesterdays (mini) FESCo meeting

[Brian Pepple]

On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 11:32 -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 11:19 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> 
> So, you should just copy and paste all of the guidelines into the
> review? :-)  Because the fact that the package follows the guidelines is
> what is supposed to be checked, not just some subset.
> 
> A much better check and balance is exactly what happened in this case;
> dgilmore saw something suspicious and held off on the branch request.
> The next step would be either just doing just sort of a quick review or
> asking someone else to do a quick pass with such a review... such random
> and spot checks of reviews will go a long way towards verification.

Aren't we looking at automating branch creation down the road?  I seem
to remember dgilmore mentioning something about this yesterday.

/B
-- 
Brian Pepple <bpepple at fedoraproject.org>

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B  CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
-------------- 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/20061229/05c54734/attachment.sig>