Re: Input Requested: revising policy for stalled EPEL requests

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:21 PM Troy Dawson <tdawson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> EPEL Issue #101 [1] has pointed out that our current policy for
> stalled EPEL requests is fairly in-efficient and can cause some long
> delays.
>
> What do people think the process should be?
>
> Here is an example:
> * A packager opens a bugzilla requesting a package be added to EPEL.
> They also express that they are willing to help maintain / co-maintain
> that package in EPEL.
> * A period of time goes by with no response
> * They re-say that they are willing to maintain / co-maintain the
> package in EPEL
> * Another period of time goes by with no response
> * They file a rel-eng ticket, that points to the bugzilla, requesting
> appropriate privileges to be able to branch and build that package in
> EPELX
> * That happens.
> * They then request branch, and build the package in EPELX following
> normal ways.
>
> This is just an example, but it's what I picture in my head.
> Troy
>
> [1] - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/101

This is the proposed policy. If people could look through it for any
problems, it would be appreciated.

**Stalled EPEL Requests**
There are times that an EPEL / Fedora package maintainer isn't
responding to an EPEL package request. If a different packager would
like to build and maintain that package in EPEL, these are the steps
they take.

* A packager opens a bugzilla requesting a package be added to EPEL.
They also express that they are willing to help maintain / co-maintain
that package in EPEL-X.

* A week goes by with no response

* They re-say that they are willing to maintain / co-maintain the
package in EPEL
** This is just incase the initial message was missed.

* A week goes by with no response

* They file a rel-eng ticket, that points to the bugzilla, requesting
appropriate privileges to be able to branch and build that package in
EPEL-X
** Currently that privilege is "admin"
** This part of the policy will adjust as various features get
implemented in pagure and dist-git

* The privileges are given
* They then request a branch, and build the package in EPEL-X
following normal steps.
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Apps]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux