Automate parts of review process?

[Brian Pepple]

On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 22:53 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-12-31 at 05:33 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > 
> > Perhaps the review process itself could use a helper that for example
> > offers the proper remaining checklists for the package in
> > question. Since the helper has access to the package it would know
> > which items of the review are irrelevant and hide them from the
> > reviewer (e.g. if the package has no python bits mask away python
> > related checks). This part would be optional, e.g. reviewers are free
> > to use the usuall methods of checking a package or could opt to using
> > the helper.
> > 
> > Would something like that make sense?
> 
> The submission process might not even have to change, it could be as
> simple as having a daemon/script/cron tracking new bugzilla review
> items, scraping the SRPM path out of it, building it in a plague
> instance, running the tool, and returning the tool output (or plague
> build failure) as a comment to the new ticket.
> 
> Short answer: Show me the tool. :)

Maybe we could look at using or extending Aurélien Bompard's fedora-qa
script?

http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/fedora-qa



/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/20061231/7b258a9d/attachment.sig>