Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging

[Alec Leamas]

On 04/26/2012 05:49 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:32:17 +0200, AL (Alec) wrote:
>
>> OT? The question here isn't really what submitters  do or don't, isn't
>> it what we could do to improve the process?.
> The point is that not all submitters are collaborative, and others don't
> seek for sponsors actively. In the needsponsor queue are lots of tickets
> where packages are not ready or where a reviewer is simply waiting for
> the submitter to respond. It isn't sooooo easy to find submitters who
> are willing for compromise and adapt the Fedora's requirements.
People are note always nice, agreed. But isn't part of the problem that 
current process forces people which just are interested in a package to 
suddenly discover that they are applying to be packagers? Shouldn't some 
of these  cases be better off if they could drop "their" package in some 
kind of wishlist 2.0, and try to get in contact with a packager instead?

Going this way would certainly enforce delays in queues, but I  guess 
people could accept that (well...)  if they knew that the alternative 
was to become a packager? A simple "How to get a package into Fedora" 
page explaining that you either must become a packager yourself or find 
one? That you must either submit a package review request or a ... 
packaging request?  In either case you need a scarse  resource: a 
sponsor or a packager.

>> I would really like to reconnect to Jon's reply at
>> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-April/166429.html.
>> What can we do to support those people who have a great app they wan't
>> into Fedora, without forcing them to be (possibly bad) packagers?
>>
>> This is related to the sponsorship process if we can find a way for some
>> of those which doesn't include sponsoring a new packager.
> I've sponsored people before _without_ requiring them to perform package
> reviews, _without_ requiring them to submit a new package first, but on
> the promise that they want to take over an orphan because they are
> interested in the package. This hasn't always worked flawlessly, because
> some people disappoint you and drop off silently. Then it's no surprise
> some sponsors (and I know a couple of others have proceeded similary) get
> more careful.
>
Sad to hear, but you don't always know why it happens. I recently had a 
contact which just disappeared, and I was irritated. Until we got in 
contact, and he told me he had been laid off.  Things are not always 
what they seem to be.

With that said, I understand that such events causes you to be more 
careful.

--a