java group

[Colin Walters]

Hi,

What would you guys think about having a subset of Java packages be
owned by a Java group?   I'm mostly thinking of random libraries; jna,
maven-*, etc.  The idea would be that anyone in this group would get
email about bugs, have permission to do patches/uploads, etc.

If there's interest in this, according to 
http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-May/msg00627.html
Toshio can create it for us and help migrate ownership of existing
packages.

Call it say java-maint(a)fedoraproject.org?

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Colin Walters <walters(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  What would you guys think about having a subset of Java packages be
>  owned by a Java group?   I'm mostly thinking of random libraries; jna,
>  maven-*, etc.  The idea would be that anyone in this group would get
>  email about bugs, have permission to do patches/uploads, etc.
>
>  If there's interest in this, according to
>  http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-May/msg00627.html
>  Toshio can create it for us and help migrate ownership of existing
>  packages.
>
>  Call it say java-maint(a)fedoraproject.org?
>  
I think that would help with coverage of issues. The main problem is
making sure that someone is taking ownership of a problem in the group
so that something does not just get 'oh I thought Colin was working on
it?'



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"

[Andrew Overholt]

* Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com&gt; [2008-05-09 13:53]:
>  On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Colin Walters
> <walters(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > What would you guys think about having a subset of Java packages be
>  > owned by a Java group? 
Tom Fitzsimmons was going to start a Java SIG.  Perhaps this can tie in
with that?

>  > [...]
>  
>  I think that would help with coverage of issues. The main problem is
>  making sure that someone is taking ownership of a problem in the group
>  so that something does not just get 'oh I thought Colin was working on
>  it?' 
Yeah, that's my only issue as well.  And it annoys me when I file a bug
and see it go to xdg-maint(a)redhat.com or something since there's no
guarantee anyone's watching that alias.

I'm sure those with a million packages like Deepak (dbhole) would really
appreciate any help, though!

Andrew

[Colin Walters]

On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 14:03 -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote:
>  * Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com&gt; [2008-05-09 13:53]:
>  > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Colin Walters <walters(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > > What would you guys think about having a subset of Java packages be
>  > > owned by a Java group?
>  
>  Tom Fitzsimmons was going to start a Java SIG.  Perhaps this can tie in
>  with that? 
Yeah, that makes sense.

>  > > [...]
>  > 
>  > I think that would help with coverage of issues. The main problem is
>  > making sure that someone is taking ownership of a problem in the group
>  > so that something does not just get 'oh I thought Colin was working on
>  > it?'
>  
>  Yeah, that's my only issue as well.  And it annoys me when I file a bug
>  and see it go to xdg-maint(a)redhat.com or something since there's no
>  guarantee anyone's watching that alias. 
That is a valid concern - however, since Fedora is in general a
community project, there's no guarantee that a bug will get a response
even if it's assigned to an actual person.

As for knowing that someone's working on a bug - Bugzilla provides a
mechanism for someone to take ownership of a bug (change state to
ASSIGNED, reassign to your email address).

I think in practice, having more people see issues and work on them
collectively will work out better than individual fiefdoms.

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Colin Walters <walters(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 14:03 -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> > * Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com&gt; [2008-05-09 13:53]:
> > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Colin Walters <walters(a)redhat.com&gt;
> wrote:
> > > > What would you guys think about having a subset of Java packages be
> > > > owned by a Java group?
> >
> > Tom Fitzsimmons was going to start a Java SIG.  Perhaps this can tie in
> > with that?
>
>  Yeah, that makes sense.
>
> > > > [...]
> > >
> > > I think that would help with coverage of issues. The main problem is
> > > making sure that someone is taking ownership of a problem in the group
> > > so that something does not just get 'oh I thought Colin was working on
> > > it?'
> >
> > Yeah, that's my only issue as well.  And it annoys me when I file a bug
> > and see it go to xdg-maint(a)redhat.com or something since there's no
> > guarantee anyone's watching that alias.
>
>  That is a valid concern - however, since Fedora is in general a
>  community project, there's no guarantee that a bug will get a response
>  even if it's assigned to an actual person.
>  
s/in general a community//

I have had more than my share of RH bugs that sat in UNASSIGNED for a
long time :).. and I worked there at the time. :)

>  As for knowing that someone's working on a bug - Bugzilla
> provides a
>  mechanism for someone to take ownership of a bug (change state to
>  ASSIGNED, reassign to your email address).
>
>  I think in practice, having more people see issues and work on them
>  collectively will work out better than individual fiefdoms.
>  
That is true... as long as the workflow is clear.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"