New review comment by paper42 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/33118#discussion_r734883407

Comment:
> Policy is just right, statement is kind of implied by previous one.
> not harsh and to the point.

I think I will leave it there even though it's implied by the first comment just to be explicit.

> how about something like *YES*|*NO* (in bolds) to make it both (even more) obvious to contributor that an answer is required and obvious to maintainer if it wasn't answered (like not checking any checkbox before).

Something like this?
```
#### Testing the changes
- I confirm this PR works for me: **YES**|**briefly**|**NO**

#### New package
- This new package conforms to the quality requirements: **YES**|**NO**

#### Local build testing
- I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (ARCH-LIBC)
- I built this PR locally for these architectures (if supported. mark crossbuilds):
  - aarch64-musl
  - armv7l
  - armv6l-musl
```

This way we can not differentiate between well tested and lightly tested PRs. The last section can not be adapted to this form, so it will be inconsistent with the rest of the PR template.