A while back I mentioned that EPEL should be listed on the front page of the Fedoraproject wiki. I filed a ticket with the web infrastructure folks (#1139) to make that happen.
Also, when clicking around on the wiki, EPEL is not listed as a SIG, nor a Sub-project. Which are we? I get confused about these terms. Either way, we should be listed on at least one of those.
I am requesting input and discussion. Thanks stahnma
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Michael Stahnke mastahnke@gmail.com wrote:
A while back I mentioned that EPEL should be listed on the front page of the Fedoraproject wiki. I filed a ticket with the web infrastructure folks (#1139) to make that happen.
Also, when clicking around on the wiki, EPEL is not listed as a SIG, nor a Sub-project. Which are we? I get confused about these terms. Either way, we should be listed on at least one of those.
At one point I believed we were both. I am not sure either. I think we started as a Sub-Project and became a SIG.. or maybe it was vice versa. Sorry for not clarifying.
I am requesting input and discussion. Thanks stahnma
epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:47:01AM -0600, Michael Stahnke wrote:
A while back I mentioned that EPEL should be listed on the front page of the Fedoraproject wiki. I filed a ticket with the web infrastructure folks (#1139) to make that happen.
Also, when clicking around on the wiki, EPEL is not listed as a SIG, nor a Sub-project. Which are we? I get confused about these terms. Either way, we should be listed on at least one of those.
It is explained on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Defining_projects that a project is defined by the Fedora Project Board (or by the project board for a sub-project). I don't recall the board nor FESCo telling that EPEL is a project, so I guess it is a SIG, but FESCo people would certainly remember better than me.
However, it may also be that these things are not that clear, since the Packaging project is not listed on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects though it doesn't seems to be the same than the Distribution project, and it is listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Defining_projects as being a main project.
EPEL is something like cross-cutting in Packaging, Infrastructure. Maybe EPEL could be seen as a SIG under both Packaging and Infrastructure. Still it is a special SIG, since it is broader than usual SIGs, and is focused on a derivative distro of Fedora, but not based on current Fedora. It is similar with OLPC, in my opinion, but OLPC doesn't appear anywhere. Also I may be the only one, but I am not a member of Fedora anymore (at least not a member of the Fedora Packaging Group), but I am still in EPEL, this is not clear that it would be possible in a normal SIG.
There is a page for EPEL as a SIG: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SIG but it is a page that I haven't updated much when I updated the wiki, and it shows obsolete information. I am not sure about the list of the SIG members, for example.
-- Pat
On 17.02.2009 18:30, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:47:01AM -0600, Michael Stahnke wrote:
A while back I mentioned that EPEL should be listed on the front page of the Fedoraproject wiki. I filed a ticket with the web infrastructure folks (#1139) to make that happen. Also, when clicking around on the wiki, EPEL is not listed as a SIG, nor a Sub-project. Which are we? I get confused about these terms. Either way, we should be listed on at least one of those.
It is explained on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Defining_projects that a project is defined by the Fedora Project Board (or by the project board for a sub-project). I don't recall the board nor FESCo telling that EPEL is a project, so I guess it is a SIG,
That's correct; it's a SIG and FESCo is above it in the Fedora hierarchy.
CU knurd
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 06:44:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
That's correct; it's a SIG and FESCo is above it in the Fedora hierarchy.
It is still very unclear to me who the SIG members are. Both a project and a SIG should know who their members are, but in the case of EPEL it is far from being clear. Indeed, for the Packaging project, members are more or less all the packagers, while it is not clear if the EPEL SIG members are all the EPEL maintainers + people interested in EPEL infrastructure + EPEL steering commitee, or if it is something else (like, for example, the list on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SIG).
-- Pat
On 17.02.2009 19:12, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 06:44:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
That's correct; it's a SIG and FESCo is above it in the Fedora hierarchy.
Maybe I should have added here: It's a SIG that is governed by the EPEL Steering Committee.
It is still very unclear to me who the SIG members are.
I'd say it's round about: If you want to become a member of a SIG then you add your name to the page in the wiki; if you want to get out you remove your name. That afaics how it works/worked in many Fedora SIGs and I see no reason why EPEL should be different.
Both a project and a SIG should know who their members are, but in the case of EPEL it is far from being clear. Indeed, for the Packaging project, members are more or less all the packagers, while it is not clear if the EPEL SIG members are all the EPEL maintainers + people interested in EPEL infrastructure + EPEL steering commitee, or if it is something else (like, for example, the list on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SIG).
I'd say it are people that have a eneral interest in EPEL and want to keep it running and help to improve it.
CU knurd
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 08:41:01PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 17.02.2009 19:12, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 06:44:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
That's correct; it's a SIG and FESCo is above it in the Fedora hierarchy.
Maybe I should have added here: It's a SIG that is governed by the EPEL Steering Committee.
Meaning the structure of leadership is even more flexible, since SIGs have no requirements on how leadership is handled.
- Karsten
On 01.03.2009 08:52, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 08:41:01PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 17.02.2009 19:12, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 06:44:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
That's correct; it's a SIG and FESCo is above it in the Fedora hierarchy.
Maybe I should have added here: It's a SIG that is governed by the EPEL Steering Committee.
Meaning the structure of leadership is even more flexible, since SIGs have no requirements on how leadership is handled.
Normally correct, but FESCo handled "running EPEL" over to the EPEL Steering Committee. So bigger changes might make that irrelevant or would require re-evaluation by FESCo.
But I doubt anyone cares there -- writing regular reports (similar to those from the FPC) also was a obligation iirc, but nobody cares that there haven't been reports for months. Similar for regular IRC meeting.
Cu knurd
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:47:01AM -0600, Michael Stahnke wrote:
A while back I mentioned that EPEL should be listed on the front page of the Fedoraproject wiki. I filed a ticket with the web infrastructure folks (#1139) to make that happen.
Yes the front page is a bit of a special case, but if you (for example) made the change, maybe no one would revert it. :)
It probably fits better than Fedora Directory Server, which is really an upstream project and not a proper Fedora sub-project. We could just replace it with EPEL.
Also, when clicking around on the wiki, EPEL is not listed as a SIG, nor a Sub-project. Which are we? I get confused about these terms. Either way, we should be listed on at least one of those.
Another thing we can influence with wiki editing. First, our pages are in Fake/Nested/Structuring, making them hard to find and search for. They need to be in categories, such as [[Category:SIGs]]. On that page, an entry needs to be made.
Just saying ... anyone interested in doing that? Learning how to do it? I can help, I just don't think I can be accountable for it being completed.
- Karsten
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:51:07PM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
Just saying ... anyone interested in doing that? Learning how to do it? I can help, I just don't think I can be accountable for it being completed.
You alredy made a proposal for renaming pages and I answered. I think you can use that to make the changes. What would be nice would be to rename links and page names at the same time. I recall something special for renames put up for mogration, maybe this can be used.
-- Pat
On 01.03.2009 08:51, Karsten Wade wrote:
Another thing we can influence with wiki editing. First, our pages are in Fake/Nested/Structuring, making them hard to find and search for. They need to be in categories, such as [[Category:SIGs]]. On that page, an entry needs to be made.
Just saying ... anyone interested in doing that? Learning how to do it? I can help, I just don't think I can be accountable for it being completed.
My problem with that layout is still not solved: How can I watch all EPEL pages (*including* new ones as soon as they got created) with that structure?
Right now that's easy: I'm subscribed to the rss feed and simply watch for EPEL/.
CU knurd
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 19:11 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 01.03.2009 08:51, Karsten Wade wrote:
Another thing we can influence with wiki editing. First, our pages are in Fake/Nested/Structuring, making them hard to find and search for. They need to be in categories, such as [[Category:SIGs]]. On that page, an entry needs to be made.
Just saying ... anyone interested in doing that? Learning how to do it? I can help, I just don't think I can be accountable for it being completed.
My problem with that layout is still not solved: How can I watch all EPEL pages (*including* new ones as soon as they got created) with that structure?
Right now that's easy: I'm subscribed to the rss feed and simply watch for EPEL/.
CU knurd
What you'll need in the future is a category watch, as the structure of EPEL/foo and EPEL/bar is going away. It has no meaning in mediawiki and makes searching worse.
I decided to start taking some action. It may not be perfect, but I get impatient, and like progress over perfection.
* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:SIGs --> Added an EPEL entry * Changed EPEL/SteeringCommittee to [[EPEL Steering Committee]] and fixed everything that linked to the old page. (The 'What Links Here' link is great like that) * Changed /EPEL/About to [[About EPEL]] -- fixed links * Changed /EPEL/WishList to [[EPEL Package Wish List]] -- fixed links * Changed /EPEL/SIG to [[EPEL SIG]] -- fixed links
That was all I really had time for tonight.
stahnma
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Jesse Keating -
Karsten Wade -
Michael Stahnke -
Patrice Dumas -
Stephen John Smoogen -
Thorsten Leemhuis