Packaging guidelines: IPv6
Paul Howarth
paul at city-fan.org
Wed Jul 5 14:43:07 UTC 2006
Jima wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> It's even worse: All FE currently has is an "initial this looks sane
>> enough" review. Once a package is in FE, there actually is no QA nor
>> audit on packages at all. Nobody but the package owner is allowed to
>> change packages. If he doesn't want to listen, nothing will happen,
>> maintainers have all kind of freedom to commit all kind of stupidities
>> they want.
>
> Huh? If a packager is committing "all kinds of stupidities" (catchy
> phrase, I like it) to their packages, someone's bound to notice in the
> emails to fedora-extras-commits (unless the packager is *really* good at
> hitting ^C at the right times!).
Ralf is one of the very few people that actually seem to read
fedora-extras-commits. I read the commits of the people that I sponsor
but that's about it. If more people read the commits list (which would
take quite a lot of time every day) it might work as a QA mechanism but
at the moment it's not a big help.
> If not, someone might notice bizarre
> behavior in the package and eyeball the CVS. Once one of the
> stupidities is discovered, they're free to submit a bug report on the
> package.
That could be a bit on the late side depending on the severity of the
stupidity.
The trick really is to get the right balance of QA and flexibility to
get things done. I don't know what the solution for that is though.
Paul.
More information about the Fedora-maintainers
mailing list