FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.

» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Packaging

LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-08-2012, 06:26 PM
Matthias Runge
Default Request for confirmation: Which form is required for a review


lately, I stumbled upon a review, which I thought, wouldn't suffice.
It looks like the following

name: ok
summary: ok
license: ok
handling locale files: ok
rpmlint output: only spelling warning
Not needed BuildRequires: (names), please remove them in git.


My question is: is this review sufficient, if not, where is it written
down, that it isn't? I'm especially aiming to the form of this review.

I wasn't able to spot a requirement to write something like approved (or
something else) on


Further more, there isn't anything said about how the reviewer should
document his work. If we deny the requirement of documenting reviewer's
operation, then just setting the approved flag conforms with the
guidelines; This also claims, everything has been checked and is well done.

Am I missing something? Is there any need to clarify our review
guidelines? Do we need something more documented? Do we trust our
reviewers, so there's no need of bureaucracy? Why should/must I do more
than just setting the flag or writing 7 catchwords?

Matthias Runge <mrunge@matthias-runge.de>
packaging mailing list

Thread Tools

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:27 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org