lpf-* packages review process.

[Sérgio Basto]

On Sex, 2013-11-22 at 13:32 +0100, Alec Leamas wrote: 
> With the lpf package under way to fedora stable and the first lpf-* 
> packages on their way into rpmfusion  there is an issue with the review 
> process fo llpf-* packages (an lpf package).
> 
> An lpf package is basically a wrapper for  the spec for a target 
> package. E. g. lpf-skype contains lpf.skype.spec and skype.spec.in (see 
> [1]).
> 
> Formally, when reviewing the lpf-skype package a reviewer should review 
> the package spec i. e., lpf-skype.spec. However, this is just some 
> copy-paste code which is more or less the same for all lpf packages. 
> It's still evolving, but it should be  more or less a non-issue when 
> reviewing.
> 
> However, each lpf package contains a target spec, skype.spec.in in the 
> example. This is the real stuff, the package user installs after 
> building it. IMHO, the target spec should be  the real issue when 
> reviewing. In a short perspective, I'm trying to keep this lpf thing in 
> a limited number of hands, so this is not a concern right now.
> 
> However, I think it's time to formalize this for rpmfusion. Since lpf 
> packages are rpmfusion only, we cannot lean on the Fedora review 
> guidelines for this. Even the tooling (fedora-review) is totally blind 
> for the target package. Which boils down to a simple question: should we 
> have a rpmfusion rule that when reviewing lpf packages the target spec 
> and package  should be reviewed somehow (as well as the "normal" spec, 
> normally a non-issue)?  Or should we just close our eyes, since we dont 
> distribute the target packages?

Hi,
Brilliant idea !. Second though: I don't believe that lpf is made in
bash, I know that you can do all with bash but so many lines!, it could
be done in so many languages, I prefer Python , but with Perl you could
do much more easy scripting .
About yours questions, of course we have 2 reviews to do for each
lpf-someting, spec.in have to be review and lpf package also, although
could be done in same ticket. (we could review spec.in by running
fedora-review with content downloaded). 
Of course we can write some notes on wiki of RPMFusion ruling this
reviews, also good for our organization. 
Yes , we need do some rules :), for example seems to me that License of
lpf-something.spec should be the license of something.spec.in , and
others fields too.


> 
> Cheers!
> 
> --alec
> 
> [1] https://github.com/leamas/lpf

Cheers!
-- 
Sérgio M. B.