On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 07:55:47AM -0200, Giancarlo Razzolini wrote: > Em janeiro 8, 2019 0:23 Santiago Torres via aur-general escreveu: > > - Have two TUs review the applicants PKBUILDs > > - Have two TUs actually decide to support this canididate > > I'm fine with the patch, but these two lines are ambiguous. Are the TUs that > are > going to review the PKGBUILD's the same as the sponsors?
This is a good point. My understanding is that sponsors generally do a preliminary review, yet everyone is encouraged to continue reviewing any PKGBUILDS during the discussion period. > Also, if we are heading > this direction of having a different set, other than the sponsors, of TUs > requiring > to review the PKGBUILD's, shouldn't this also be added to the bylaws? This is also true. I'm not sure if that's something we want to put in the bylaws or it's just somewhat of an untold rule/expectation. What're everyone's thoughts on this? Thanks, -Santiago.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
