| 1 |
On 14-12-2017 13:39:18 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 14 grudnia 2017 13:21:47 CET, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
> >Can we make it a policy to list /what/ QA issues are the justification |
| 4 |
> >for commits like these? A description in the commit message would be |
| 5 |
> >preferred, but a pointer to a location where said issues can be found |
| 6 |
> >would do too. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Maintainer-needed is reason enough. If somebody couldn't be bothered to maintain what he committed, why should we bother to list the issues? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
It seems to me you are avoiding the question. There are no issues with |
| 11 |
the ebuild. It seems like there is just a false claim there are QA |
| 12 |
issues, and that is used as waiver to remove the package. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> Using repoman and looking at CI mails is also a good idea. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
repoman full (stable) is happy on 8b4ea0f6d2bed140116f69855d1d3100ea0cf020. |
| 17 |
qa-reports.gentoo.org has nothing to report |
| 18 |
gentoo-qa@ ML has nothing to report |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Please list the QA issues: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> >On 14-12-2017 12:10:59 +0000, Andreas Hüttel wrote: |
| 23 |
> >> Also other QA issues. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Apart from that maintainer-needed has nothing to do with Quality of an |
| 26 |
ebuild, you mentioned it as an QA issue, so I am interested in the |
| 27 |
"other" QA issues, which seems to suggest 2+ problems in this *ebuild*. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
For the record, I didn't commit this ebuild. I'm just extremely unhappy |
| 30 |
about the tiggerhippy response of QA which in my opinion is totally |
| 31 |
uncalled for, and am extremely worried about the integrity of QA because |
| 32 |
of seemingly false claims to justify actions. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Thanks, |
| 35 |
Fabian |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 39 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives