Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging

[Aleksandar Kurtakov]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alec Leamas" <leamas.alec at gmail.com>
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel at lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:13:52 PM
> Subject: Re: Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging
> 
> 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?

Nice idea if there was a pool of packagers just waiting for something to package. While the reality is exactly the opposite. Most packagers are overloaded and we even drop packages intentionally as we can not keep the pace. So it's in Fedora's best interest to get more people working on the packages instead of creating wishlists for packagers.

Alex

> 
> 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
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel