Stable Release Updates types proposal

[Terry Barnaby]

> 
> This isn't really true. Or at least, not a productive perspective for
> improving Fedora. There are certainly a lot of bugs in the open drivers
> shipped with Fedora, and there's a lot of work to do to fix them all. I
> sent my own reply to Terry explaining how we're handling this at
> present, but just waving the 'it's all NVIDIA's fault' stick at the
> problem won't make it go away :)

One little point I noticed recently. I was watching and testing
a package released by Fedora. I was having some email conversations with
some of the upstream developers of that package at the time.

>From what I noticed, there did not seem to be much communication between
the Fedora packagers and the upstream developers. Particularly
the upstream developers appeared to be unaware that their code had been packaged
for Fedora/Redhat etc. In fact they were looking at creating
a binary release and looking at how to test it on various platforms.

I don't know if this is an isolated case, but if it is common maybe:

1. The upstream developers email addresses or mailing list could be
   added to an email list on the package in the FedoraBuild system.
2. When a package is submitted for testing then an email and possibly
  other communications is made between the packager and the upstream
  developers with the suggestion that the package has been built for
  testing.
3. All RPM fixes required are emailed back to upstream developers.

It seems to me that it would be good if the upstream developers knew
of the package and were encouraged to test it. They are most likely
to find any initial obvious issues.

Cheers


Terry