<div dir="ltr"><div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 5:31 AM, Tomas Tomecek <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ttomecek@redhat.com" target="_blank">ttomecek@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Quoting Pierre-Yves Chibon (2014-09-05 17:08:39)<br>
<span class="">> New procedure<br>
> =============<br>
><br>
> * packager opens a review-request on bugzilla<br>
> * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to ?<br>
> * reviewer does the review<br>
> * reviewer sets the fedora-review flag to +<br>
> * packager goes to pkgdb2 to request new package and specifies:<br>
> - package name<br>
> - package summary<br>
<br>
</span>How about taking this from specfile? (and therefore provide a tool for<br>
maintaining specfiles & srpms for reviews)<br>
<span class="im"><br></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It'd be great if the fedpkg tool could do some of this. For example, fedpkg could create git repos locally, from a template and a few questions, for new packages, which could be pushed somewhere for review (usually GitHub, I'd imagine). It could even create the review bug automatically, as well as assist in the review process for the reviewer (setting the correct flags).<br><br>Once approved and the package is created in pkgdb, git could be adjusted automatically from a clone of this original repo created by the fedpkg tool.<br><br>This puts some burden on the reviewer to review not only the package, but also the use of the packaging process: ensure that the user created the git repo correctly. But, that might not be a bad thing. I was struck by how "manual" the new package process was, and how "automated" everything is later. It's a big gap that could be closed with more tools on the "prepare for review" side of things.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class="im">
> - package branches<br>
> - link to review on bugzilla<br>
> => requests added to the scm admin queue<br>
> * cvsadmin checks the review (check reviewer is a packager¹)<br>
> * cvsadmin approves the creation of the package in pkgdb<br>
> => package creation broadcasted on fedmsg<br>
> * git adjusted automatically<br>
<br>
</span><span class=""><font color="#888888">Tomas</font></span><br></blockquote></div><br><div>Overall, I like the proposal, but I think it could be made simpler on new packagers (and reviewers) with better tooling (which I suppose could be considered out of scope for this proposal, but something to consider in future).<br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><br>--<br>Christopher L Tubbs II<br><a href="http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii" target="_blank">http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii</a></div></div>
</div></div></div></div>