Hello,
Such a difference is made in the text 'Communicate with the EPEL SIG or other EPEL contributors '. I think that this is an unneeded distinction. In my opinion everybody contributing to EPEL (packages, infra...) is in the EPEL SIG. Is it agreed?
-- Pat
On 28.10.2008 10:58, Patrice Dumas wrote:
Such a difference is made in the text 'Communicate with the EPEL SIG or other EPEL contributors '. I think that this is an unneeded distinction. In my opinion everybody contributing to EPEL (packages, infra...) is in the EPEL SIG. Is it agreed?
For me a "EPEL contributor" is a "ordinary" contributor that is for the most part only interested in his or her own packages and nothing else.
A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
CU knurd
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull, what you are is what you do. It doesn't seems to exist in fedora, and shouldn't exist in EPEL either, in my opinion. Now we could have personal responsibilities, but I don't think that now a SIG is needed. At some point it was needed, because it was a SIG within fedora, but now that, although still in fedora EPEL has its own life, I don't think it is really important.
-- Pat
On 28.10.2008 12:53, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull,
For us that's true. But for the SIG members it's something different; they can feel special if they are part of a SIG, and that might help getting them more involved to help bring EPEL forward.
I'd leave the SIG stuff in place as it is, as it doesn't do any harm but might help. References to the EPEL SIG and it's Steering Committee might also exist in other parts of the wiki and might be important for the government modell. FESCo iirc put "driving EPEL" in the hands of the EPEL SIG and its steering committee.
CU knurd
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:15:42PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 28.10.2008 12:53, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull,
For us that's true. But for the SIG members it's something different; they can feel special if they are part of a SIG, and that might help getting them more involved to help bring EPEL forward.
But don't they feel likely special when they are subscribed to the list and help making the decisions here?
You didn't really responded to the question about who is an EPEL SIG member. The people who put themselves on the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SIG page? I don't think it makes sense. Otherwise said I don't think there is an need for an artificial differentiation among EPEL contributors when it is not associated with entrance barriers nor special powers nor a need to communicate EPEL contributors. There was a need, in the past to communicate who was really interested in EPEL, when the project was small, but today, is there such a need?
I'd leave the SIG stuff in place as it is, as it doesn't do any harm but might help. References to the EPEL SIG and it's Steering Committee might also exist in other parts of the wiki and might be important for the government modell. FESCo iirc put "driving EPEL" in the hands of the EPEL SIG and its steering committee.
The steering commitee is another story, I think it makes sense, and it is in my opinion, something similar with FESCo for fedora (and with less missions). There has to be some way to decide when there is no agreement. It is the steering committee that FESCo endorses, not the SIG.
-- Pat
On Tue October 28 2008, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull, what you are is what you do. It doesn't seems to exist in fedora, and shouldn't exist in EPEL either, in my opinion. Now we could have
For the Fedora Collection there exist FESCo, rel-eng, the infrastructure team and a lot of SIGs and also a lot of other groups (artwork, website, translation, ...), so there is some distinction.
Regards, Till
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:28:32PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
For the Fedora Collection there exist FESCo, rel-eng, the infrastructure team and a lot of SIGs and also a lot of other groups (artwork, website, translation, ...), so there is some distinction.
There are also some rel-eng and infras people for EPEL, and the other groups are, in my opinion also part of EPEL (artwork, website, translation) as EPEL is under the fedora umbrella. But there is no fedora SIG, and I don't think that FESCo plays this role either -- FESCo is the equivalent of the EPEL Steering commitee.
There could be SIGs within EPEL at some point, but I don't think about EPEL as a SIG. That doesn't matter much in the end, I don't care, this is very formal. No problem with readding something about the EPEL SIG.
-- Pat
On 28.10.2008 14:04, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:28:32PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
For the Fedora Collection there exist FESCo, rel-eng, the infrastructure team and a lot of SIGs and also a lot of other groups (artwork, website, translation, ...), so there is some distinction.
There are also some rel-eng and infras people for EPEL, and the other groups are, in my opinion also part of EPEL (artwork, website, translation) as EPEL is under the fedora umbrella. But there is no fedora SIG, and I don't think that FESCo plays this role either -- FESCo is the equivalent of the EPEL Steering commitee.
As mentioned earlier today on this list already: the EPEL SIG (and it's steering committe) is below FESCo in Fedora's government model (or did that change recently? then I missed that).
There could be SIGs within EPEL at some point, but I don't think about EPEL as a SIG.
Neverthelees it was created as one and the SIG (not the Steering Committee iirc; that was build by the SIG) got permission to run EPEL from FESCo.
/me now tries to stay away from this discussion
CU knurd
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 02:28:48PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
As mentioned earlier today on this list already: the EPEL SIG (and it's steering committe) is below FESCo in Fedora's government model (or did that change recently? then I missed that).
Ok, FESCo is above in the command chain, but the missions are similar (except that EPEL doesn't need to duplicate some FESCo missions, like being above the packaging commitee or other transverse SIGs that are of relevance for both EPEL and fedora as a distro).
There could be SIGs within EPEL at some point, but I don't think about EPEL as a SIG.
Neverthelees it was created as one and the SIG (not the Steering Committee iirc; that was build by the SIG) got permission to run EPEL from FESCo.
Is it still true? Reading the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SteeringCommittee page, except for the historical remark that the steering commitee was formed by the SIG, there is no specific mention of the SIG (only one where it is side by side with the community and the steering commitee). It seems to me that all the authority the SIG once had is now in the hands of the steering commitee. But I may be wrong.
-- Pat
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Patrice Dumas -
Thorsten Leemhuis -
Till Maas