On Thursday 08 February 2007 18:07, Brian Pepple wrote: > On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 09:42 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > > > Incompatible package upgrade policy. A good start that probably wouldn't > > stir up too heated discussions right from the start would be defining how > > these cases must be communicated. Recent example: > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2007-February/msg00069. > >html > > I've been working on the Maintainer Responsibility policy for a bit, and > there is a section about notifying others about changes that may affect > their packages. Is this sufficient, or do you think we should address > is somewhere else? > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MaintainerResponsibilityPolicy I think that's a good start, but it lacks two key bits: 1) Where to send the announcement. There is a note about that being dependent on mailing list reorganization, but IMNSHO it shouldn't wait for that - just specify a list where to send them for now. This list would be a natural candidate, but AFAIK non-Fedora-maintainers can't post here which is a drawback (think non-critical update and 3rd party repos not being able to update dependent packages in the planned timeframe due to whatever reason and wanting to discuss that in public). I tend to think that this is acceptable for an interim solution before the ML reorganization is finished. 2) When to send the announcement. I think something like one week would be a good default; if later, do it as early as possible. And another last heads up note on the day the update is actually going to be built. -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
