Res: Open Letter: Why I, Kevin Kofler, am not rerunning for FESCo
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
johannbg at hi.is
Tue May 4 15:55:29 UTC 2010
On 05/04/2010 01:50 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> You must all realize that the ratio of bureaucracy/process burden and
>> quality of maintainers/packagers go hand in hand. The better the
>> maintainers/packagers/components are less bureaucracy/process burden is
>> needed. The worse it gets more bureaucracy/process burden is needed. If
>> ye all feel that the bureaucracy/process burden is increasing that only
>> means that the quality of maintainers and their components is going
>> down.. ( we might be getting more components inn in less quality ).
> If our maintainers suck, bureaucracy is not a good solution to fix that
> But we already have a group of trusted maintainers, it's called
> "provenpackager". We could give provenpackagers the power to push directly
> to stable without any karma requirements.
Given the requirements FESCo + if they checks on the bugzilla activity
of the individual that wants to become a provenpackager and take that
into consideration when approving the request I dont see why not.
So basically it would be like this..
If you are a provenpackager you have the power to push directly to
stable without any karma requirements however if you are not a
provenpackager you will have to follow what ever procedure FESCo RELeng
and QA come up with at any given time until you have been accepted as a
provenpackager by FESCo.
Sounds like a draft to a solution everyone can agree with?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 322 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100504/f4e1bad8/attachment.vcf
More information about the devel