On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@gmail.com> wrote:
Needs addressed: * a package signoff can be marked as either 'known bad' or 'not enabled'. These are distinct boolean options, setting either of them will not allow signoffs.
Unless I'm doing things wrong, this is only available for the packages I built. This defeats the purpose of the 'known bad' flag. Anyone should be able to flag any package as bad. This seems fishy. Anyone can mark a package as bad? I'm not sure I agree here. Perhaps the equivalent of a "negative signoff" would make more sense, but a truely bad package should be removed from the repos ASAP, not marked here.
Just to be clear, by anyone I meant any dev or TU. Obviously, a package with major issues should be removed from testing but if it has minor issues (file conflicts, missing files like man pages, missing depends, etc) that should be fixed before pushing it to the main repo, there should be a way to mark it on the signoff page. Like a negative signoff as you called it. So that it does't get moved to the repos by mistake in case the maintainer checks the signoff pages before checking his emails. That's what my feature request was about. OK, this makes sense. The data model is somewhat set up to allow this; I probably won't get to this immediately but it shouldn't be too hard to add the ability to signoff in a negative way. (there is also a yet-unused comments field attached to each signoff that is not yet exposed in the UI).
-Dan