isn't allowing PRs.
I've pushed to a branch here with updates and dead-link-fixes for the README:
@Kevin Fenzi , you're welcome to pull that (or use it) into the repo if you think it
looks good. Aside link fixes, it conditionalizes the blurb about "don't apply for
sponsorship unless you have packages that have gone through package review process",
which I think is what deterred me here.
Cheers,
Malcolm
On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 21:30:02 +0000, Malcolm Inglis <miinglis(a)amazon.com> wrote:
Thanks, Fabio!
I'm sorry I missed the process to cut a ticket in packager-sponsors.
I've done that now:
https://pagure.io/packager-sponsors/issue/511
That doc page was one of the few I was bouncing around until I opted
to email this list. That page linked to the repo's README, which then
linked "Procedure for new packagers" to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
, which linked back to the original doc page. That page had a section
on "How to find a sponsor", which seemed to imply I'd need to find a
sponsor to volunteer *before* moving ahead. Meanwhile, I noticed that
several 'Self Introduction' emails on this list had sought and
received sponsorship, so I figured this was a way that would work.
It may help if said doc page elaborated the process, perhaps by
describing an example request, and if the README on
`packager-sponsors` was also elaborated and updated to not link to
dead wikis. I can try to send some PRs to help out there.
I understood why `packager` membership is required for various
infrastructure access; it makes perfect sense to avoid managing
effectively-free-world-writable storage :) I don't believe I raised
any contention there. The PR that Maxwell linked seems very appealing,
though. It would be great if PRs with new sources from
non-packager-members could pass CI without any action from
maintainers.
The problem that Maxwell raised about sources updates is not one that
I've experienced. I've had a PR with new sources be accepted as-is
just fine (
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-prompt-toolkit/pull-request/1
). It's just that the CI run was failing (as per state of my other
outstanding PRs) until the maintainer stepped in.
Cheers, Malcolm
P.S. my apologies for letting my corporate mailserver rules mess up
the thread subject by adding '[EXTERNAL]'. I'll try to catch that in
future.