On 04/23/09 16:23, Doug Leavitt wrote: > As I understand it, if the package doesn't pass validation it is not > eligible to be promoted, and voting is unnecessary. > > If it has been validated then people can vote on it, and the > submission can be rejected with a single -1 vote from anyone > eligible to vote. > > [jucr team, these are accurate statements, correct?]
Yes - All Correct. - Dermot > > Only packages with 2 +1 votes and no -1 votes, and a day of waiting, > are eligible to be promoted to /contrib. > > > If any approver notices a collision coming from a roboporter > package, please give the submission a -1 vote and a comment > what it collides with so we can correct the problem. > > Thanks in advance, > Doug. > > > Alan Coopersmith wrote: >> http://jucr.opensolaris.org/review/packages/351/ is the package in >> question - I can't see how to reject it though, is that because it >> failed to validate? >> >> (It's actually for an older bugfix release 2.3.4, instead of the 2.3.7 >> we currently ship - probably because they took the SFE spec from when >> the bundled freetype was still at 2.1.x and SFE wanted a newer one, but >> since we upgraded the bundled one, SFE hasn't needed to keep their spec >> updated.) >> >> -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com >> Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering >> >> Doug Leavitt wrote: >>> I'll second Christian's yes from my side of the field, and add that >>> in theory all pkgfactory submissions should already be filtering >>> for this type of error. We currently have collision detection code >>> in pkgfactory and we are actively checking everything we build against >>> the base release we are building on (snv_101). >>> >>> That said, if something slips by our collision detector, please >>> reject the package and let us know, so we can look at why it it was >>> not caught. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Doug. >>> >>> Christian Kelly wrote: >>>> Alan Coopersmith wrote: >>>>> Jim Walker wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> If you are listed here as a Package Advocate: >>>>>> http://opensolaris.org/os/community/sw-porters/contributing/reporoles/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> So one of the packages I see in the queue is SFEfreetype, which >>>>> duplicates >>>>> a library we've shipped in Solaris for many years and which is >>>>> already in >>>>> both /release and /dev - should we be rejecting such packages as >>>>> duplication? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Yes, we should be rejecting submissions like these, and there have >>>> been a few we have rejected already. >>>> >>>> I'm working on some conflict detection code which will catch some of >>>> these submissions and we're also implementing a search feature which >>>> will help users to check whether they are duplicating work or not. >>>> >>>> _Christian >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> sw-porters-discuss mailing list >>>> sw-porters-discuss at opensolaris.org >>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/sw-porters-discuss >> >> > _______________________________________________ > sw-porters-discuss mailing list > sw-porters-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/sw-porters-discuss
