Fedora.next in 2014 -- Big Picture and Themes

Pierre-Yves Chibon pingou at pingoured.fr
Mon Jan 27 08:11:30 UTC 2014


On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:20:33AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> On 23.01.2014 19:26, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info> wrote:
> > The packaging guidelines are very daunting.  Automating as much of
> > that as possible, either through spec creation tooling or package
> > review tooling would help.
> 
> I think it's not only the packaging guidelines imho, it's the whole
> processes around package maintenance -- for existing packagers and
> newcomers.
> 
> I for example recently saw that a package I used to maintain long ago
> was outdated in fedora 20. I chose to ignore it in the end, as I didn't
> want to nag the current maintainers via bugzilla (yes, I should have
> done that; sorry, was overly careful or lazy, but that's how people are
> quite often afaics); I would have preferred to simply do a "fedpkg clone
> foo; <update, build, quick test run>" and then submit it to rawhide,
> without fearing somebody might yell at me(¹). IOW: like editing a
> wikipedia page, even if that's in the end more work that simply filing a
> bug.
> 
> (¹) Yes, I still have provenpackager rights, so I could have done that,
> but that wouldn't be considered appropriate under current rules

In pkgdb2, I'm replacing the wording 'Owner' by 'Point of contact' for this
exact reason, trying to get people to change their relation to 'their' package
into a relation where they are simply the primary point of contact, not a big
deal if someone updates it in rawhide w/o breaking too much.

Hopefully with time it will help changing things :)

Pierre


More information about the devel mailing list