Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging

Thu Apr 26 20:35:27 UTC 2012

On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 08:49:32PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
> No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 19:49, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> escreveu:
> > On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote:
> >> BZ718430
> >>
> > So reading that with the meat seeming to come from here:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352#c5
> >
> > it looks like Simon has been working on packaging what you were working on
> > but hadn't gotten to submitting it for review yet (because he found problems
> > with licensing that needed to be resolved).  I don't read what he said in
> > his comment as saying that he did not want you to work on your package....
> 
> Toshio... a few things:
> 
>  1) Upstream from UH fixed the licenses a long time ago, it wasn't
> really a show stopper when I submitted the request. Furthermore, for
> openSUSE submission I got other issues, such as they were reluctant in
> accepting guichan on Factory since it hasn't been maintained for 2
> years. Upstream UH offered themselves to maintain guichan.
> 
>  2) Chris Mueller, one of the main developers of UH on behalf of the
> UH Team stated clearly that UH Team was never contacted regarding
> those issues, else they would be available to fix them. He asked me if
> I could maintain it for Fedora (in-distro) since Fedora users were
> asking for it that way. Fedora has quite some expression in Germany
> and in Europe, and like I've defended before, even that Fedora isn't
> aimed for traditional end users it has a very strong image in the
> Linux world and users use it :)
> 
>  3) What I've learned on openSUSE was that potential packagers should
> investigate is there's previous work on the package we want to
> maintain and respect it. That's what I did, he claimed to be working
> on it, I've backed down. Furthermore, I do maintain Fedora/RHEL
> packages on OBS for upstream which actually exist. I've tried to step
> up to easen up for everyone, it didn't worked out.
> 
> Did I proceeded wrong ?
> 
Yes.  Although "wrong" is a bit too strong.  There's a misunderstanding
occurring at step 3 let me include the next snippet from you since that's
part of the misunderstanding here:

> >
> > Now... here's what I think the current process is supposed to look like.
> > Simon's replied to the Fife bug saying that he's done some work on trying to
> > package UH but maybe doesn't realize that you've already got an attempt at
> > packaging it under review.  Next comment from you could be:
> 
> A small thing... Please search for Unknown Horizons on BZ... How was I
> supposed to know people were working on it ? As far as I can see, my
> request was the first to land, right ?
> 
Right.  Your review request was the first to be entered into bugzilla.
Typically, in Fedora, that means you're well on your way to becoming the
owner of that package.  Simon had been working on the same package privately
for a while but he hadn't yet considered his approach to be good enough to
open a review request.  The fact that he'd been doing that should not in any
way prevent your package submission from going forward.

At the point of the bugzilla bug for updating fife, what typically happens
in Fedora is that the two packagers become aware that they have both been
working on the same thing.  One of the packagers is further along in the
process than the other (in this case, that would be you as you had actually
opened a package review bug for Unknown Horizons).  The other packager
offers to help by reviewing the package, become a comaintainer, etc.  The
time taken to review the package decreases and the resulting package is
better maintained because there are two people interested in seeing the
package pass review and enter Fedora.

So what failed here?  I get the impression from the comments in the fife bug
and here that you read Simon's comments as a request for you to cease your
efforts to package Unknown Horizons into Fedora proper (as opposed to via
OpenBuildService).  I don't get that same impression (possibly because
I know how this should work/has worked for other Fedora packages in the
past).  So I'm trying to explain:

  1) That there was no reason for you to stop your efforts at packaging the
  software for Fedora.

  2) That perhaps, part of the misunderstanding is that Simon didn't realize
  that you had already submitted Unknown Horizons, or that you had already
  had the licensing concerns addressed, or that there were ways that he
  could help get your version of hte package reviewed and into Fedora.

  3) How to try and coordinate two people who are interested in the same
  package's efforts so that the software gets into Fedora quicker and with
  more people who can maintain it into the future.

>
> > Hey Simon, I have also attempted packaging for UH and have a review request
> > open for it here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430 We've
> > resolved some of the licensing concerns already but I'm not sure if we found
> > and addressed the one that you're pointing out.  I'm not a packager yet but
> > I'd like to be.  Would you be willing to review my package and give feedback
> > on your current work?  If you're a sponsor or would be willing to mentor me as
> > a comaintainer of the UH package once it passes review then we could get
> > a lot more done between the two of us.  Thanks!
> 
> Toshio, he tried, I've actually done it and my packages are being used
> by upstream.
>
What was tried?  The goal expressed was getting Unknown Horizons packaged
into Fedora proper.  If I'm reading the review requests correctly, I'm not
seeing that that goal was achieved (or is in progress).  What I'm trying to
express is that it seems like working together and packaging this for Fedora
was abandoned at this point in time over what I think is simply
miscommunication or a misunderstanding of how Fedora packagers are supposed
to interact when their packaging interests coincide.

> See how cool upstream is... even if I don't follow the
> project closely I get on my email all the critical fixes required...
> It's really a waste when we have such a cool upstream and things don't
> happen.
> 
> Simon can pretty much use my previous work or my current work on OBS.
> If he wants I don't mind if he maintains it for Fedora and I maintain
> on EPEL (I've actually far more interested on EPEL than Fedora since I
> actually use RHEL on two of my machines).
> 
> All my current work is available here:
> 
> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=unknown-horizons&project=games%3Aunknown-horizons
> 
While this is a great service, this is not as helpful as it could be.  There
are only a limited number of packagers.  Since you were willing to become
a Fedora packager, it would be tremendously more helpful if you had
continued along the path of getting your Unknown Horizons package into
Fedora.  That way your goal of seeing Unknown Horizons in Fedora proper
would have been met and we would have had a maintainer that was committed to
properly maintaing their package.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120426/090c574a/attachment.sig>