[Fedora-spins] MIA spins

Peter Robinson pbrobinson at gmail.com
Thu May 27 13:10:25 UTC 2010

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 08:44:50AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> 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,
> I agree that the spin process and ownership is in an unclear state.  I
> asked two questions in my original message that are unanswered, and I
> think Spins SIG members must answer to improve the situation:
> (1) Who is responsible for gathering schedule and report the changes
> needed -- actionable tasks, who does them, and the start and end
> dates?
> (2) What are the unclear areas of the process, and what are the
> suggestions for fixing them?  (Note I already cleared up one area, but
> surely there are others as Peter notes.)
> A "fire and forget" approach once Spins are accepted doesn't encourage
> the health and smooth operation of a SIG.  It's important for all the
> SIG members to help their fellows and the group by participating in a
> review of the process and making it easier to follow.

Thank you Paul appreciated. What is the status of actually getting the
Moblin spin up on s.fp.o? Its been 2 days and its still not there.
Fixing of the process is needed for F-14 but at the moment the 100s of
hours of work I have done for F-13 is still not available and I'm not
sure why.


More information about the spins mailing list