[fab] looking at our current state a bit

[Dennis Gilmore]

On Friday 03 November 2006 07:49, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 12:07:44 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >  * FE6 seems to be okay as well (Extras didn't manage to push a proper
> > comps.xml in time -- shame on us)
>
> JFYI: An updated comps.xml is in place since the day before yesterday
> (this is too late for the FC6 roll-out, but read on below), and I might
> help with updating it in an automated way, too.
>
> Once more this shows that communication is far worse than it could be.
>
> The comps.xml files in the repository have _not_ been updated since April
> 17th. That makes me wonder why contributors have been asked to add new
> entries in CVS and why a "comps SIG" has been created? There also doesn't
> seem to be any public communication about what the 2-3 people, who have
> "comps.xml automation" assigned to themselves, are working on or what they
> have discussed before. That is a "behind closed doors" development model,
> where any contributions from outside bear the risk of being wasted time
> (because of redundancy, reinventing the wheel or because of going into a
> different direction).
As one of the people that it is assigned to.  All communication has taken 
place in public.  it has all taken place on irc in #fedora-admin and 
#fedora-extras Perhaps  thats a communications method  that does not work for 
you.  but that has been where it has been happening.  

Currently the goal is to add to the push scripts  so that the first step is to 
checkout the cvs tree check if comps.xml.in is updated.  if so run make comps  
check the return status  if make was ok put new comps in place and do rest of 
the push. if  make comps fail  a flag will be set and the push will proceed 
with the old comps.xml file.

-- 
Dennis Gilmore, RHCE
Proud Australian