The new Update Acceptance Criteria are broken
a.badger at gmail.com
Wed Nov 24 11:22:55 UTC 2010
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 08:31:15AM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/23/2010 06:51 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > IMO, the real problem is not "backports" vs. "upgrading" to "fix bugs",
> > it's bugs not getting fixed in Fedora, for a variety of reasons.
> > Therefore, I consider trying to apply any such simple "policy" to be
> > impossible and naive.
> Agreeable logical conclusion.
> The underlying problem needs to get address and fixed first.
> I proposed this as a possible long term solution in one rough possible
> way a bit back on a different list to try to address the underlying
> issue but I did not receive any feedback on that proposal.
> 1. Improve the general standard of packagers ( need to at least have
> upstream bugzilla account and are part of or in good communication with
> the upstream community )
> 2 Allow for a adjusting period when it's over revoke the rights from
> those that already have but do not full fill this requirements. Package
> goes up for grabs or gets dropped.
I don't agree with the combination of the above two. The first is a nice to
have but we also have to realize that requiring that will require lots more
manpower. Step #2 is basically the enforcement phase for making #1
a requiement. I think that at some point maintaining a package becomes too
much effort and as the number of packages that were too much effort build
up, the utility of Fedora goes down.
> 2. Allow all maintainers to touch every component in Fedora note that
> maintainer that brought the component to Fedora is still responsible for
> his components.
I like this idea.
> 3. Gather what information from all those maintainers we have in the
> community what their code skill are and in which language and what skill
> level their expertise is.
> 4. Assemble a "bug fixing task force" ( can be per language ) to target
> component ( including testers if needed ).
I like this idea as well however...
> 5. Assign a component to the "bug fixing task force" and assign a time
> period they should spend looking at the bugs on that component and
> fixing them could be a day a week a month starting from critical path
> and onwards.
We have a tiny version of this in the FES tickets for fixing bundled
libraries. I note that the python sub-ticket of that is the only one that's
been closed. The C and php ones have hardly been touched. I'm not sure
what would make this experience more productive.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20101124/f0226750/attachment.bin
More information about the devel