Hi Andi
Andreas Jaeger
I don't see this guideline as a law but as guidance. So, let's talk about exceptions. And if you have a suggestion for a better wording then please propose one.
As we have many guidelines for our packages, but less "laws", I always follow this direction when I review packages for factory: * submission violates the law: reject (including hint or URL as reason) * submission violates the guideline: accept (including hint or URL to the guideline asking to think about for next submission) * submission does not violate anything above, but I have a bad feeling: ask other reviewers - or discuss directly with the packager. In worst case: reject * submission does not violate anything above, but I have a hint for the packager: accept, including my hint * … My feeling is now that I am not a good reviewer as I accept too many packages. My hope is/was that packagers read my comments even if their package gets accepted for Factory. If this assumption is wrong, we should discuss what I can do instead. Currently I do not like the idea to reject packages because of guideline violations, but if my notes are not read if I accept a package, than I should adapt to a better strategy. Suggestions welcome! Lars -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org