Does Fedora have a technical expertise oriented SIG?

[Peter Jones]

On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 09:13:07AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-11-02 at 10:13 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > Is there any authoritative group at Fedora who wants the product to not
> > > suck like that?
> > 
> > Authoritative? Probably FESCo.
> 
> Well, this sounds like a packaging issue, doesn't it?

Er, no?  I see where you're coming from, and the distinction can be
somewhat muddled at times.  It is in a package, granted, but so is
everything else, but "Software should honor TMPDIR and everything across
the distro should have the same defaults" isn't really about packaging
the software at all.

> Wouldn't the expected outcome be a packaging guideline for how to deal
> with temporary directory locations? So, the packaging committee...

Maybe, but maybe not?  Look at it this way: the last times we changed the
rules here are effectively these two features:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ServicesPrivateTmp
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/tmp-on-tmpfs

Both of them specify that things should use /tmp - the first for a
select batch of programs, the second for the whole distro.  In neither
case is there an FPC ruling on the matter, and in neither case is
the actual packaging /necessarily/ affected.  If there's no need to have
a specific rule about where a packager should be installing files, what
kind of config file should be used to manage something, or other things
of that nature, this sort of thing usually doesn't go through FPC.

-- 
        Peter