Re: PEPr Automated Verification Process - first enhancements

From: Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 02:01:55 +0000
Subject: Re: PEPr Automated Verification Process - first enhancements
References: 1  Groups: php.pear.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-38165@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 18:14 +0200, Stefano F. Rausch wrote: > Dear PEAR-Devs, > > Tobias and I would like to inform you that some of the enhancements regarding the PEPr process > have been committed to cvs. > > What follows is a detailed description of the changes: > + > + case 'pkg_source': > + return preg_match('"^http\://.+\.(phps|htm(l)?)$"', $url)? > true: false; or .txt I guess... - if you dont run .phps on your server, uploading a php file as a .txt, at least get's it rendered... it also rules out people doing stuff like 'http://myapplication/render?name=somefile/xyz.php' Nothing like a simple problem becoming more complex, the more you look at it.. > (3) NON-RFC PROPOSALS > > In non-RFC proposals the providing of 2 links is mandatory - the first 2 link fields are > flagged with a red asterisk, when the following events take place: > > - change of status (see (1)) > - edit-modus in the "Proposed" phase > > Furthermore, on top of (1), the first link must be of type "PEAR package file (.tgz)" > and the second one can be of any available type. > > The reasoning behind this approach is, that at least source code must be made available and > hopefully a further valuable link of any type is made available for the reviewers. I'd rather you have a series of blank options [---type---V] [url] [---type---V] [url] [---type---V] [url] [---type---V] [url] + a message say what is required.. then check that all the required types have been added... (eg. like source url / example url etc...) > > (4) HANDLING OF CHANGELOG COMMENTS > > Now changelog comments are being accounted for, > when a change of status from "Proposed" to "Called for Votes" is being > initiated simultaneously, I always wonder if we should allow comments on draft proposals - it would save alot of time for the proposers trying to come up with a proposal that may never be accepted... Regards Alan > i.e. any remarks will be recorded and displayed in the last phase of a proposal and not be lost > as in the old version. > > -- Stefano > -- Alan Knowles <alan@akbkhome.com>

« previous php.pear.dev (#38165) next »