On 05.12.2007 16:27, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 09:29:41AM -0500, John Dennis wrote:
> If you think the problem would be mitigated by package maintainers
> rigorously reviewing all changes *after* they've been committed you're
> forgetting human nature and the fact most maintainers are over worked to
> begin with. By extension if you demand maintainers review every commit then
I completly disagree with that. If a packager is not capable of
reviewing everything that goes through for his package then something
is definitely wrong. Either the packager should orphan the package or
ask for co-maintainership but should never let something happen without
noticing.
Well, with the CTRL+C bug you might not get a mail if someone changed
something.
And if we like it or not, I bet we have packagers that just delete CVS
commit mails to their packages when they come home after a three weeks
holiday and find > 20.000 mails in their inbox. I think that's bad, but
that's how some humans are sometimes afaics.
It is different, not the same workflow. It seems to me that, for
example,
it is very time saving to have someone change the spec, ask a mail for
rebuild, without going through bugzilla. Still the package maintainer has to
understand enough every patch (or trust the other contributor enough
after review).
+1
(As a side note I personally think that rebuilds/publishing should
not be
open while cvs should be.) It is more or less the case given that there
is bodhi for stable, but for rawhide it is not the case.
Yes and no. With the current CTRL+C bug someone else might commit
something bad to a package owned by someone else. Sooner or later the
real owner might do a fresh checkout (something some people do regularly
instead of having a local checkout), do another change, build and push.
Cu
knurd