Package review SIG dead?

Stanislav Ochotnicky sochotnicky at
Fri Oct 7 09:19:27 UTC 2011

Excerpts from Richard Shaw's message of Thu Oct 06 22:17:51 +0200 2011:
> After some initial interest there doesn't appear to be any activity
> unless I'm missing something.
> I am still interested. Anyone else?

Sorry for taking time to reply, but I had a bit too many things at
once sprung up on me

So...During FUDCon Milan a few of us decided to do a hackfest
session on timlau's FedoraReview tool[1].

It seemed like a good base for a review tool, the basic architecture
seemed flexible enough etc. Our latest version is at github[2] as
well. Changes from timalu's version:
 * split checks based on them being general or specific to certain
 * dynamic loading - every python file dropped in checks subdir is
   considered a test module.
 * fix several problems with running local checks without bug in
 * Cleaups, pep8 applications

It would be great to have a way so that everyone can implement checks
in their language of choice, but for the time being we did this.

Idea is to have each SIG maintain their own checks/templates together
with their guidelines.

I know a lot of people wanted to have a discussion about this first,
but since we had the opportunity to hack on this we did. I believe
there are still many of us still interested, just not knowing what
exactly we should do next.


Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky at>
Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno

PGP: 7B087241
Red Hat Inc.                     
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the devel mailing list