Fedora clean up process seems to be seriously broken...

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 23:16:30 +0000
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hum not so sure that will effectively work at least the cleanup
> process needs have take place before we start the next development
> cycle atleast no later then GA so basically the "performance" review
> of the maintainer would have taken place in F15 for F17 and would
> take place in F16 for F18 etc...

I didn't mean to suggest I was doing a performance review. 
I was just saying we could gather more data and see how widespread
things are and how we could improve them. 

> > Note that we need to balance here cases like:
> >
> > * maintainer is very active, just ignoring $leafpackage right now.
> 
> Indicator that the maintainer needs comaintainers

Sure. We don't have this data currently anywhere central we can act on. 

> > * maintainer is on vacation/sick/etc
> 
> Indicator that the maintainer needs comaintainers

Sure. We don't have this data currently anywhere central we can act on. 

> > * maintainer needs help, we should try and help them out.
> 
> 
> Indicator that the maintainer needs comaintainers if not that,
> workload could be spread out to other community groups
> ( provenpackager/QA etc )

Sure. We don't have this data currently anywhere central we can act on. 

> > * maintainer doesn't use our bugzilla as their primary bug zone.
> 
> That problem can be solved technically as in be made transparent to 
> reports and maintainers ( reporters using our bugzilla but
> maintainers using their relevant upstream one )

Not sure how off hand. ;( 

> > * maintainer maintains a software that has a vast number of bugs and
> >    they can't deal with them all.
> 
> True but you would actually see that on the activity on the bug report

Yes, you would see it on the collection of data report I suggest above
as well. 

> > * maintainer is working on higher priority bug, so ignoring feature
> >    requests/etc.
> 
> Again that would be seen on the activity on the bug report
> 
> Encase we are "short" on maintainers one way to increase that pool
> would be to drop the ownership model essentially making everybody 
> provenpackager and allow everbody to play in everybody's pool...

I don't think thats completely a good idea. 

You would get lots of people not feeling responsible for anything in
particular. You would get people changing things when they didn't have
good communication with upstream or a good idea for bugreports, etc.

kevin


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20111122/fd71b35f/attachment.bin