[Fedora-packaging] Review Guidelines simplifications

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

>>>>> "JK" == Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> writes:

JK> How should this be handled when one new package depends on another
JK> new package, both going through review at the same time?

Indeed, this would needlessly complicate reviews which depend on one
another.  It's bad enough as it is because it takes ages for the
packages to actually get through the system, but at least without a
"builds in koji" requirement the reviewer can put things in a local
repo and get their end of the process done.

Now, sure, it would be nice if everyone tested in koji or local mock
whenever possible, so it's certainly worth talking about getting some
recommendations into the guidelines.  It would also be nice if they
posted rpmlint output from the resulting packages and explained all of
the issues present.  I fear that something like this is going to be
required if the review process is ever going to actually work properly
and we're not going to suddenly see ten times as many people reviewing
packages.

 - J<