On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:07:40AM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:EPEL
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL -- no changes I can see.
I psopose to merge a simple text after 'EPEL for Contributors', see below.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/About -- does this make sense to how EPEL is being used these days?
It doesn't do harm, in my opinion. I find this page well written and think that it can be kept as is.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/AskForFedoraPackageInEPEL -- seems ok.
Right.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/CommunicationPlan -- not sure this is current.
I don't really see the interest of this page, it is largely duplicate of the About page, and I think that the text is less clear. The faq links to an entry in that page (ISV), though. What is interesting should be merged in About, in my opinion.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ContributorStatus -- not current.
I think that the list of fedora packagers not interested should be kept and merged in the main EPEL/ContributorStatus page, the other list removed, except for Ville entry which would also be in EPEL/ContributorStatus. Then there should be a way to query from the database all the maintainers that maintain at least one EL branch. I'll mail Toshio to ask whether it is possible. And the text on this page should certainly be shortened.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ -- rewrite time.
I have read it, and I only found a reference to owners.list that should be changed, but otherwise I don't see what's wrong.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies -- update
I suggest remomving the How will the repository actually look like? part since it is both wrong and unuseful.
EPEL branching if Fedora maintainer does not react is covered in more detail elsewhere.
I am not sure that this section fits here: Involve Employers: Packaging as a Job Duty
Otherwise everything else looks good to me.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/PackageMaintainer/GenericJobDescription -- review please
Looks good. I don't really get the interest of this page, but it is linked from many other docs, and I think that I have the background to comment about that page.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ReleaseManagers -- update/rewrite.
I think that this page should better be rewritten from scratch. It would be nice to have something about EPEL infrastructure, indeeed.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SIG combine with about?
I don't think this page is needed anymore. I would propose instead to merge what is interesting in this page to the front EPEL page. The contact information is already here, the only missing information is how to join but it is so simple that it doesn't really requirers a specific page, I think that a short text right after 'EPEL for Contributors' should be enough, along:
Joining EPEL s as simple as being part of Fedora (e.g. be a part of the packager group in the account system) and having a love for Enterprise Linux. Details are in the [[EPEL/FAQ#Contributing_to_EPEL| FAQ entry on contributing]].
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Schedule -- MASSIVE CLEANUP
Somebody from the steering commitee should certainly rewrite it.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- dead tree
Looks like a personnal list, can be kept but should not be linked from anywhere. Currently it is linked from EPEL/Schedule, but this page has to be rewritten anyway.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/WishList ??? is this still useful. Basically what isn't wanted in EL-4/5?
Maybe there could be instead a query to packagedb that shows packages that don't have an EPEL branch. But I am not sure that it is very interesting, in my personal case all the packages that are not in EPEL are not there on purpose.
Most is deprecated, and otherwise it is a duplicate of the list of packagers not interested in EPEL.
As always I can do the changes I advocate if agreed.
-- Pat