代码拉取完成，页面将自动刷新
We just made an investigation on all the public packages in openEuler to evaluate their formalization and stability. It seems that currently lots of spec files are not clear enough. We believe that it will bring much difficulty to fully understand the purpose of each patchset for contributors, especially for OS vendors to merge the picked patchsets.
Please let me take the project httpd for elaboration.
Package init
Advice: It would be better if it could show more information about the baseline version of this package and where the package comes from, community or some other distros? A specific baseline version could be helpful when dealing with dependencies. In particular, it would be very helpful if many patches are already included in this first change (e.g. lxc)
Advice: The changlog, with corresponding git commits is very important for contributors to know what's changed. We'd better to keep them in solid relationship and provide substantial content for both.
delete some patches
Advice: There are also several similar messages, e.g.
fix some bugs,adjust the spec,merge upstream patches,fix cvesand etc.
Although we may be able to see which patches are deleted from git commit, probably we should also provide why and how to delete some patches. How about provide the ID or URL for the bug/CVE/patch?
Any feedbacks are welcome. Thanks.
Hey @imjoey, Welcome to openEuler Community.
All of the projects in openEuler Community are maintained by @openeuler-ci-bot.
That means the developpers can comment below every pull request or issue to trigger Bot Commands.
Please follow instructions at https://gitee.com/openeuler/community/blob/master/en/command.md to find the details.
此处可能存在不合适展示的内容，页面不予展示。您可通过相关编辑功能自查并修改。
如您确认内容无涉及 不当用语 / 纯广告导流 / 暴力 / 低俗色情 / 侵权 / 盗版 / 虚假 / 无价值内容或违法国家有关法律法规的内容，可点击提交进行申诉，我们将尽快为您处理。
/kind bug
Thank you for your detailed description. Yes, it is a bug that the community need handle seriously.
What should we do?
Firstly I will share this information in the mailing lists, and try to find engineers who may not be in the list.
Secondly, I will arrange kind of training for the maintainers/committers who are reviewing.
It will not be easy to improve in one day, but I will continue helping on this.
@imjoey thanks so much for the advice. that's really helpful.
Thank you for your detailed description. Yes, it is a bug that the community need handle seriously.
What should we do?
Firstly I will share this information in the mailing lists, and try to find engineers who may not be in the list.
Secondly, I will arrange kind of training for the maintainers/committers who are reviewing.It will not be easy to improve in one day, but I will continue helping on this.
@Fred_Li thank you very much for your efforts. Yep, openEuler is a fast-growing community, my team and I will also continue to make openEuler better. :-)
This is a very good point to improve the current commit/push quality: we can see it is a common issue.
I suggest that a review process or a gatekeeper role should be implemented by each domain, maybe the maintainer are a good condidate. And a commit template should be set-up for everyone.
the commit template should be include the followings:
Commit summary,
Commit details,
Commit test verification.
TodoList and etc.
@freesky-edward how about this opinion?
登录 后才可以发表评论
