Sponsorship model

[Parag Nemade]

Hi all,
     I see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_gro...
says that

" The best ways for you to illustrate your understanding of the
packaging guidelines
are to submit quality packages and to assist with package reviews."

My question is that is it really mandatory for new contributors to
assist with pre-reviews of packages in NEW queue? Can we sponsor new
contributor based on his package submissions only( say he submitted 3
to 5 packages)?


Regards,
Parag.

[Tom Callaway]

On 06/03/2010 08:44 AM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
>  Hi all,
>       I see
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_gro...
>  says that
>  
>  " The best ways for you to illustrate your understanding of the
>  packaging guidelines
>  are to submit quality packages and to assist with package reviews."
>  
>  My question is that is it really mandatory for new contributors to
>  assist with pre-reviews of packages in NEW queue? Can we sponsor new
>  contributor based on his package submissions only( say he submitted 3
>  to 5 packages)? 
Technically, yes, you can, but I strongly recommend that you have
him/her review someone else's package before sponsoring that person. It
provides sufficient evidence that they are aware of the Packaging
Guidelines and can identify issues in other packages that they did not
write the spec file for.

~spot

[Jon Ciesla]

On 06/03/2010 07:44 AM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
>  Hi all,
>        I see
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_gro...
>  says that
>
>  " The best ways for you to illustrate your understanding of the
>  packaging guidelines
>  are to submit quality packages and to assist with package reviews."
>
>  My question is that is it really mandatory for new contributors to
>  assist with pre-reviews of packages in NEW queue? Can we sponsor new
>  contributor based on his package submissions only( say he submitted 3
>  to 5 packages)?
>
>
>      
My understanding has been that it's not absolutely necessary, but 
preferred. Ultimately it's up to the sponsor's judgement, so long as the 
person demonstrates ability and understanding of the guidelines. It's 
just very, very highly recommended, as pre-reviews are a great way not 
only to demonstrate, but to learn. I've taught people quite a bit by 
critiquing their practice reviews, and they've generally found the 
experience helpful.

-J
>  Regards,
>  Parag.
>  --
>  packaging mailing list
>  packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
>      

-- 
- in your fear, speak only peace
   in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 06/03/2010 02:44 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
>  Hi all,
>        I see
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_gro...
>  says that
>
>  " The best ways for you to illustrate your understanding of the
>  packaging guidelines
>  are to submit quality packages and to assist with package reviews."
>
>  My question is that is it really mandatory for new contributors to
>  assist with pre-reviews of packages in NEW queue? 
IMO, yes.

>  Can we sponsor new
>  contributor based on his package submissions only( say he submitted 3
>  to 5 packages)? 
IMO, no. The point behind all this is the candidate to demonstrate his 
"understanding". As I see it, "number of packages" isn't actually

related to this kind of "understanding".

"3 to 5 packages" can mean a packager blindly and mechanically copying 
other people's works without him actually having understood what he is 
doing.

On the other hand, there are candidate packagers with a long history in 
packaging and deep understanding which simply are "new to Fedora" and 
are unfamiliar to the "Fedora packaging" process.
In these cases, "3 to 5" packages may easily be a too high measure.

Ralf

[Parag Nemade]

Hi,

2010/6/3 Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt;:
>  On 06/03/2010 02:44 PM, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >      I see
> >
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_gro...
> > says that
> >
> > " The best ways for you to illustrate your understanding of the
> > packaging guidelines
> > are to submit quality packages and to assist with package reviews."
> >
> > My question is that is it really mandatory for new contributors to
> > assist with pre-reviews of packages in NEW queue?
>
>  IMO, yes.
>
> > Can we sponsor new
> > contributor based on his package submissions only( say he submitted 3
> > to 5 packages)?
>
>  IMO, no. The point behind all this is the candidate to demonstrate his
>  "understanding". As I see it, "number of packages" isn't actually
> related to
>  this kind of "understanding".
>
>  "3 to 5 packages" can mean a packager blindly and mechanically copying other
>  people's works without him actually having understood what he is doing.
>
>  On the other hand, there are candidate packagers with a long history in
>  packaging and deep understanding which simply are "new to Fedora" and are
>  unfamiliar to the "Fedora packaging" process.
>  In these cases, "3 to 5" packages may easily be a too high measure.
>
>  Ralf
>
>  
I see all above replies in favor of sponsor person to ask new
contributor to pre-review some packages. Can't then this be mandated
to each sponsor that before he will sponsor someone he must ask new
contributors for pre-reviews? I think it should not be good to have
something written(to assist with package reviews) in sponsorship model
and we are taking its meaning something else (not needed pre-reviews).

The only reason I am in need of this explanation is that then I will
not ask new contributors for pre-reviews and will sponsor them based
on their submissions only.

Parag.

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 06:48:32AM +0530, Parag N(पराग़) wrote:
>  
>  I see all above replies in favor of sponsor person to ask new
>  contributor to pre-review some packages. Can't then this be mandated
>  to each sponsor that before he will sponsor someone he must ask new
>  contributors for pre-reviews? I think it should not be good to have
>  something written(to assist with package reviews) in sponsorship model
>  and we are taking its meaning something else (not needed pre-reviews).
>  
>  The only reason I am in need of this explanation is that then I will
>  not ask new contributors for pre-reviews and will sponsor them based
>  on their submissions only.
>   
This should have gone to the devel list rather than the packaging-list but
oh well..


Over the past several years, we've been reworking pieces of the
infrastrucure and the packager policy in response to requests to be able to
sponsor people without having them prove that that they are knowledgable
packagers.  Instead sponsorship into packagers represents a sponsor deciding
that a packager is someone that can be taught how to package.  This allows
the sponsor to mentor the packager as they work on an existing package
rather than packages that are wholly new, for instance.

The split of provenpackagers and packagers was the big change that was meant
to enable this.  No longer were packagers able to commit to any of the
thousand packages that was opened to the packager group, instead they were
only able to commit to packages where they were granted explicit power to
commit.

Similarly, recently we reworked the sponsor responsibilities page to say
that the sponsor is not responsible for cleaning up after their spnsorees in
the event the sponsoree wreacks havoc -- instead the package maintainer who
adds the packager to the commit acl for their package is taking
responsibility for cleaning up.

The idea that the pre-review is a necessary step to sponsorship is not
entirely in keeping with this, making the step mandatory, even less so.

-Toshio