[Fedora-spins] spins in f19

[Gerard Ryan]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 25 Jan 2013  at 13:54:04 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>a) what about the new spins that didn't get added in f18?
>If their spin owners are actually active, they should chime in and
>commit their ks to git and update the f19 spins page with their size
>and so releng knows to produce them.

*chime*

While I'm glad our JVM developer spin (or whatever it will be called),
didn't get added for F18 (the conversation came around far too late);
I'll try to push a little harder for inclusion in F19. I don't think
our current 'remix' is in a fit state to be committed as an official
spin just yet (when we figured it wasn't going to be an official spin
for a while, we got a little experimental). I'll try to get some time
to clean it up and propose it soon, but it might be about a week
before I even get to look at it.

On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:03:17PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:29:34 +0000
>Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What about using the Feature process to get them approved?
>
>Well, they all followed the process in f18, so I would say just add
>them in... but sure. For new ones just making them do that might be
>fine.
>

 From experience with trying to get approval last year, the main
problem seemed to be that the burden seemed to be falling solely on
Christoph to do the brunt of the work of making sure each kickstart
was in an acceptable shape, and organising meetings to get consensus
for approval. I don't have much previous experience with the spins
process, but I think if that same process was applied slightly
differently, then it could work fine (it could also be severely flawed
and doomed from the outset, I don't know). Here's what I'm thinking:

1. Someone has a new spin that they would like to get added, so they come
here to find someone who already has gone through the process and
maintains a spin, to review/'wrangle' their kickstart into acceptable
shape.

2. When it is deemed acceptable, it's proposed here (I guess link to a
wiki page in the current format, which additionally includes the name
of the person who reviewed/wrangled it). It's discussed here for a
predetermined time (week/fortnight) to give all relevant parties ample
opportunity to air their concerns or give their approval --
eliminating the need for everyone to be available at the same time for
a meeting.

3. Once the time period is up, the person who reviewed it helps the
new spin maintainer to get it added. I'm not sure what exactly needs
to be done here, as I haven't gotten that far myself.

^So basically something similar to getting sponsorship to be a
packager I guess.

Whatever the process, I might repropose the JVM developer spin from
scratch, since it changed a lot from the point it was proposed last
time (proposed prematurely to be in for the deadline, July/August).

Gerard.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
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=pGXO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----