[Fedora-spins] MIA spins

[Peter Robinson]

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/27/2010 12:15 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 07:37:48 +0100,
>>   Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> WooHoo... nearly 2 days after the release and there's still no signs
>>> of the Moblin spin. I'm not going to yell and scream like some would
>>> about their spin but it would be nice to see some kind of update as to
>>> why its still missing? I don't see that request as being unreasonable
>>> after all I feel I put as much work into my spin and it can't help to
>>> feel to me a little unfair and disappointed. If it was some other spin
>>> all hell would have broken lose.
>>>
>> I think that would depend on which spin. This isn't the first time something
>> bad has happened with a spin. I don't remember hell breaking loose in the
>> past.
>>
>> Certainly it is unfortunate and disappointing that it happened.
>>
>
> I have long since advocated that spin owners be granted access in Fedora
> infrastructure to compose their own spins and release engineering not
> take this role.  The current method is simply not scaling well and we
> have seen enough proof of that by now.

I'm not sure the pros and cons to the above, or whether there's
something as basic as access to signing keys that might restrict that.
I'm quite happy for the infra team to deal with it, generally they've
done a sterling job and I hope to see Moblin spin shortly, pity its
well behind the watershed and the MeeGo 1 release will no doubt dampen
down the effect but that is life.

What I would like is a much better defined spin process. I've been
involved in the spin process for 2 releases now, managed to miss the
boat with F-12 because there was no where on the spin process and no
prior announcements to cut off dates. I actually made it in with 2
spins this process (maintain moblin, co-maintain sugar on a stick) but
it was certainly not without issues.

Peter